Woman wins millions in lottery 4 times!

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

What in the hell is extreme luck? Is luck some kind of measurable property?

Edit:

@kirottu 3 of those were scratch off tickets, so she wouldn't even know the numbers. She'd just get the next one from the machine, completely random.

Get Luck at 10 and you start doing crazy stuff.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Name me another even that happened that had 100 trillion to one odds.

 

How about this? Or this? Or this? Or even, given the probably of a group of atoms occupying any specific quantum state at a certain time is remote, some magnetic phenomenae occur that rely on the existence of certain quantum states.

 

But regardless, whatever makes you feel better.

 

And how, exactly, is this about feeling better? This is about you getting math wrong and making asinine claims, nothing more and nothing less.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Name me another even that happened that had 100 trillion to one odds.

 

How about this? Or this? Or this? Or even, given the probably of a group of atoms occupying any specific quantum state at a certain time is remote, some magnetic phenomenae occur that rely on the existence of certain quantum states.

All of those probability claims are obviously bogus, you'll note they don't even show derivation.

But regardless, whatever makes you feel better.

 

And how, exactly, is this about feeling better? This is about you getting math wrong and making asinine claims, nothing more and nothing less.

You're the most asinine around here, I'm tired of trying to dispute your stupidity.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

All of those probability claims are obviously bogus, you'll note they don't even show derivation.

 

And you have? Oh, but wait, I forgot that you like pulling stuff out of your ass and not getting called on it.

 

...I'm tired of trying to dispute your stupidity.

 

Then how about you learn some math* and come back after you've done that?

 

 

*And by math I mean real math and not Dagon-Maths™.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Calax]

How about you Dagon? Humanity as a whole has survived stupidly high odds to become what we are today on the top of the heap. And heck, when a man loves a woman, and she becomes a mommy, it's what a 1 in 16million chance that its' YOU that is reaching the egg? So in theory the fact that you exist denotes your statement as false.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

EDIT: Never mind.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Balthamael]

Name me another even that happened that had 100 trillion to one odds. But regardless, whatever makes you feel better.

 

 

You insist bringing this number up despite it having been shown to be nothing better than a guess. You said you were trying to estimate the order of magnitude, but nothing in your methodology fills me with confidence that you have anywhere close to the correct probability, or even order of magnitude. Earlier in this thread I demonstrated the correct method for solving this kind of problem, which you declared to be "completely wrong for reasons you are too lazy to explain". I must know insist that you explain what exactly was wrong in my math, other than that it disagreed with your made-up number.

 

To make a decent estimate for the probability of this event, you need to have estimates for a single ticket winning, and for the amount of tickets the lady has purchased over her life.

[alanschu]

No, the reason it matters that she already won twice is because at the start you have the entire pool of everyone in the world who plays the lottery who can potentially win once. But when you only count people who already won twice, you only got a handful of people who potentially could win the third time. Sure, the odds of a particular person in the pool winning are still the same as the first time, but now you only got a handful who can win at all.

 

I'm not sure I follow here.

 

I just want to make sure we're clear: are you saying that after someone wins the lottery, the chances of them winning another lottery is less than the chances of some other unique individual winning the lottery? My next post depends on your answer.

Edited July 16, 2010 by alanschu

[alanschu]

Are you talking about the gambler's fallacy? What mathematicians and statistians are clueless about it?

 

The gambler's fallacy is nothing compared to the Monty Hall problem.

 

 

I was considering introducing this problem into the thread earlier. It's a great example of conditional probabilities and the funny part is even when the math indicates otherwise, there are still people that are adamantly against it. It's a shining example of how poor, and stubborn, common sense really can be at times.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

I just want to make sure we're clear: are you saying that after someone wins the lottery, the chances of them winning another lottery is less than the chances of some other unique individual winning the lottery?

 

I believe that he is, based on other posts, but if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt that's up to you (personally, I've come to the conclusion that he knows bollocks about math)

[Thorton_AP]

A scam from 2002:

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/805438/posts

 

 

Oh wait, I mean supernatural phenomenon right?

Edited July 16, 2010 by Thorton_AP

[kirottu]

Math aside, isn

[Calax]

Math aside, isn

[Amentep]

Math aside, isn

[Pidesco]

"the fallacy is the belief that the "universe" somehow carries a memory of past results which tend to favor or disfavor future outcomes."

 

That explains Wrath's mistake about perfectly.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Name me another even that happened that had 100 trillion to one odds. But regardless, whatever makes you feel better.

 

 

You insist bringing this number up despite it having been shown to be nothing better than a guess. You said you were trying to estimate the order of magnitude, but nothing in your methodology fills me with confidence that you have anywhere close to the correct probability, or even order of magnitude. Earlier in this thread I demonstrated the correct method for solving this kind of problem, which you declared to be "completely wrong for reasons you are too lazy to explain". I must know insist that you explain what exactly was wrong in my math, other than that it disagreed with your made-up number.

 

To make a decent estimate for the probability of this event, you need to have estimates for a single ticket winning, and for the amount of tickets the lady has purchased over her life.

The only doubt I had about my derivation is whether you have to divide by the amount she spent once or several times. After thinking about is some more, I'm now confident it's only once, since she'd have to spend that money to even be in the pool which could likely win the lottery the second time. As far as your calculation, you'd have to show me the exact calculation you used since I can't tell what you're doing. You seem to have forgotten to include the factorial in the binomial theorem.

 

No, the reason it matters that she already won twice is because at the start you have the entire pool of everyone in the world who plays the lottery who can potentially win once. But when you only count people who already won twice, you only got a handful of people who potentially could win the third time. Sure, the odds of a particular person in the pool winning are still the same as the first time, but now you only got a handful who can win at all.

 

I'm not sure I follow here.

 

I just want to make sure we're clear: are you saying that after someone wins the lottery, the chances of them winning another lottery is less than the chances of some other unique individual winning the lottery? My next post depends on your answer.

No, I'm saying the potential pool of people who have already won the lottery once is a lot smaller than the potential pool of people who can win the lottery for the first time.

 

A scam from 2002:

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/805438/posts

 

 

Oh wait, I mean supernatural phenomenon right?

That has already been posted. She only won the lottery twice, with the second one being a relatively high chance lottery. I already said it's possible for someone to win the lottery twice, there are several people who have done it, and the odds say it will happen every few years.

 

Math aside, isn

Edited July 16, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Humodour]

LOL!

[WorstUsernameEver]

LOL!

 

I think the term you were looking for is 'R00fles!'.

[Thorton_AP]

She only won the lottery twice, with the second one being a relatively high chance lottery.

 

She won it twice on the same day. The odds of this happening are roughly 1 in 23 trillion.

[Gorgon]

Dice have no memory.

 

 

Someone probably said that already, but it's an important lesson in remedial probability mathematics.

[Calax]

Dagon, how many of your dads sperm died so that you could reach your mothers egg?

 

How many of his dads sperm died to fertilize him?

 

etc etc

 

The chances of yours, mine, and everyone else EXISTENCE is infinitesimal compared to the number of possibles that died so that your specific paternity could come to fruition. Using your discussion points here, in this thread, none of us should exist, particularly not in our current form. But the thing is we do... well most of us do, some of us are just digital phantoms born from T.O.M.B.S. to harass and annoy the living

 

The sheer odds of the survival of a single member of our species to meet and reproduce is staggering, and let's not go into the odds of creating a universe (and don't turn this into a philosophical discussion about god creating the universe, I'm using this as an example that odds this astronomical aren't insurmountable by chance. God's creation is moot because we're already here).

 

Or for a better illustration:

 

A man releases, in one ejaculation, 200-500 million sperm. They're all gunning for a single, solitary egg which may or may not be there. There are 340,500 births per day in the world, from the meetings of one egg to one sperm (a 1/200000000 chance).

 

And that's just a perfect petri dish conditions, you toss in possible ovary/fallopian problems, lifestyle, miscarriages, abortions and the like and that number WILL skyrocket probably above the "one-in-a-trillion" mark you're so fond of

[alanschu]

No, I'm saying the potential pool of people who have already won the lottery once is a lot smaller than the potential pool of people who can win the lottery for the first time.

 

Let's try this:

 

Chuck just won a lottery. This lottery has a chance of winning it of 1 in a million. What is the probability that Chuck wins this lottery again?

[Wrath of Dagon]

No, I'm saying the potential pool of people who have already won the lottery once is a lot smaller than the potential pool of people who can win the lottery for the first time.

 

Let's try this:

 

Chuck just won a lottery. This lottery has a chance of winning it of 1 in a million. What is the probability that Chuck wins this lottery again?

If he buys one ticket one time, 1 in a million.

[Wrath of Dagon]

She only won the lottery twice, with the second one being a relatively high chance lottery.

 

She won it twice on the same day. The odds of this happening are roughly 1 in 23 trillion.

Nope, they're not. That article doesn't know what it's talking about, just like the 4 time winner article I posted was claiming odds of septillions, which is entirely bogus. Since the lottery probably happens once a week, the odds of winning two in the same day are 52 times greater than the odds of winning 2 in a year, etc.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[alanschu]

No, I'm saying the potential pool of people who have already won the lottery once is a lot smaller than the potential pool of people who can win the lottery for the first time.

 

Let's try this:

 

Chuck just won a lottery. This lottery has a chance of winning it of 1 in a million. What is the probability that Chuck wins this lottery again?

If he buys one ticket one time, 1 in a million.

 

Don't distract yourself with "one ticket" stuff. I have fixed the odds to control for it and simplify situation. The odds of winning this lottery is one in a million and is static.

 

I will assume that you feel that the odds of chuck winning another lottery is possible.

 

 

Chuck wins this lottery (an event that can possibly happen). As a result, he has now won two lotteries. What is the probability that Chuck wins this lottery again?

Edited July 16, 2010 by alanschu