Mathematically, that's true. But I'd argue that in actuality the coin is more likely to come up tails with each toss. Put money on the next toss and tell me which way you'd bet.
Which means that you don't really understand it (mathematically).
And what's confusing is that if you flip a coin 11 times, you ARE more likely to end up with 1 head and 10 tails than 11 tails. I think people intuitively know that, and they're just over-applying that rule.
Only if order is not important. I'd say that people intuitively "know" that 10+1 is more likely even if order is important, which is of course wrong.
With who was Einstein talking to when those words was said and who was right?
I'm not sure he was talking to someone specifically. It was said during the scientific discussions that gave birth to quantum theory. Einstein didn't accept the idea that quantum physics, and therefore the whole world, was based on probabilities, randomness. He was convinced that if we couldn't predict the exact result of something, but only the probability of it happenning, was because there were some parameters that we couldn't see or know, but still would affect the outcome. The world couldn't be random, God didn't play dice. However, it was proven later that no such hidden parameters can exist. Nature really works through random events. Einstein was wrong. And boy do we physicist find the universe weird and fascinating
And about this 3-door-quiz, well I had a 2 hour discussion about it with my Probabilities teacher, and not much got out of it. I'm a the side that you got a 50/50 chance. The 2 choices are independent events. You make a decision, with 3 avalaible doors, then you make another one, completely separate, with 2 doors. That's it!
Heck, one could argue that if you get hit by lightning it means you're more likely to be in an area where you are more likely to get hit, since you were *once*...
Unless the first lightning strike killed you. In that case, your chances of being struck by a bolt of lightning directly are diminished quite a bit.
Really. From what I gather reading the article...the actor was standing on a hill, holding an umbrella during a lightning storm...TWICE. That's not genius...that's stupidity.
As far as the Last Temptation of Christ...the money from the major studio producers were pulled during shooting. I believe Scorcesse (sp) had to round up money elsewhere to finish it. It still is to me a masterpiece. Mel's got a lot of work to do.
Really. From what I gather reading the article...the actor was standing on a hill, holding an umbrella during a lightning storm...TWICE. That's not genius...that's stupidity.
As far as the Last Temptation of Christ...the money from the major studio producers were pulled during shooting. I believe Scorcesse (sp) had to round up money elsewhere to finish it. It still is to me a masterpiece. Mel's got a lot of work to do.
Nah. Mel's on a "Mission of God" or something. Love that director get-up he's been wearing...
I didn't get a good look at his outfit, but Mel is a good director. From his SNL appearances and other interviews I take him to be a fairly nice guy, but I'm aware that he is supposed to be a somewhat zealous catholic.
Lightning strikes have historically been attributed to an upset god. I'm not sure if this hold's up in catholic doctrine or if the devil has equal influence on atmospheric electricity, but if someone is theological inclined to attribute acts of weather to be "acts of God" he would probably take pause.
Comments
Originally posted by SDW2001
Mathematically, that's true. But I'd argue that in actuality the coin is more likely to come up tails with each toss. Put money on the next toss and tell me which way you'd bet.
Which means that you don't really understand it (mathematically).
Originally posted by BRussell
And what's confusing is that if you flip a coin 11 times, you ARE more likely to end up with 1 head and 10 tails than 11 tails.
Only if order is not important. I'd say that people intuitively "know" that 10+1 is more likely even if order is important, which is of course wrong.
Originally posted by 123
Which means that you don't really understand it (mathematically).
Yup.
Anders, 2003
From god over game shows, abstract math of probability, coins to theoretical physics. This thread gets around.
Originally posted by Anders
With who was Einstein talking to when those words was said and who was right?
I'm not sure he was talking to someone specifically. It was said during the scientific discussions that gave birth to quantum theory. Einstein didn't accept the idea that quantum physics, and therefore the whole world, was based on probabilities, randomness. He was convinced that if we couldn't predict the exact result of something, but only the probability of it happenning, was because there were some parameters that we couldn't see or know, but still would affect the outcome. The world couldn't be random, God didn't play dice. However, it was proven later that no such hidden parameters can exist. Nature really works through random events. Einstein was wrong. And boy do we physicist find the universe weird and fascinating
And about this 3-door-quiz, well I had a 2 hour discussion about it with my Probabilities teacher, and not much got out of it. I'm a the side that you got a 50/50 chance. The 2 choices are independent events. You make a decision, with 3 avalaible doors, then you make another one, completely separate, with 2 doors. That's it!
I don't really have anything to add, but I laughed so hard and so long I felt compelled to check in and say well done.
Originally posted by Anders
It was in discussions with Niels Bohr
The famous Swede?
(i'm JOKING Anders!)
Originally posted by Kickaha
Heck, one could argue that if you get hit by lightning it means you're more likely to be in an area where you are more likely to get hit, since you were *once*...
Unless the first lightning strike killed you. In that case, your chances of being struck by a bolt of lightning directly are diminished quite a bit.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Mathematically, that's true. But I'd argue that in actuality the coin is more likely to come up tails with each toss.
I'd love to play blackjack with you some time.
Originally posted by Anders
Fuzzy math
Really. From what I gather reading the article...the actor was standing on a hill, holding an umbrella during a lightning storm...TWICE. That's not genius...that's stupidity.
As far as the Last Temptation of Christ...the money from the major studio producers were pulled during shooting. I believe Scorcesse (sp) had to round up money elsewhere to finish it. It still is to me a masterpiece. Mel's got a lot of work to do.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
Really. From what I gather reading the article...the actor was standing on a hill, holding an umbrella during a lightning storm...TWICE. That's not genius...that's stupidity.
As far as the Last Temptation of Christ...the money from the major studio producers were pulled during shooting. I believe Scorcesse (sp) had to round up money elsewhere to finish it. It still is to me a masterpiece. Mel's got a lot of work to do.
And the circle is now complete.
Originally posted by Moogs
All I know is, I'd walk off the set / quit the part after the first lightning strike. I may have a thick skull, but I'm not that thick....
Nah. Mel's on a "Mission of God" or something. Love that director get-up he's been wearing...
Originally posted by Frank777
WOW. A thread that's been absolutely, thoroughly hijacked from the SECOND POST. That's gotta be an AI record.
I don't really have anything to add, but I laughed so hard and so long I felt compelled to check in and say well done.
Yeah, but I like math puzzles so I didn't mind.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
Nah. Mel's on a "Mission of God" or something. Love that director get-up he's been wearing...
I didn't get a good look at his outfit, but Mel is a good director. From his SNL appearances and other interviews I take him to be a fairly nice guy, but I'm aware that he is supposed to be a somewhat zealous catholic.
Lightning strikes have historically been attributed to an upset god. I'm not sure if this hold's up in catholic doctrine or if the devil has equal influence on atmospheric electricity, but if someone is theological inclined to attribute acts of weather to be "acts of God" he would probably take pause.