Woman wins millions in lottery 4 times!

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Of course, you may be correct one time in like a trillion years, but obviously this means we must live to be a trillion in order to witness this event.

 

Not necessarily, once-in-a-trillion-years odds do not preclude something happening more than once, or not at all, in that time-frame (although I'm almost positive that you're being sarcastic, I'd thought I would mention that anyways).

 

Edited July 17, 2010 by Deadly_Nightshade

[alanschu]

Yes I was being sarcastic

 

I don't recall the continuous Random Variable, but if we pretend that the world moved in discrete seconds for a moment, it's effectively a poisson-distribution.

 

 

Simply because something has lambda value of 1 trillion, doesn't mean it cannot happen in the next interval. In fact, if the event does occur, it MUST happen immediately after the prior interval. It was more a comment to the various times Dagon seemed to indicate that in order to observe something that has a once in a trillion year occurrence, you must live to be a trillion years old. Though as you and I both know, even that's not a guarantee you'll see it

 

 

I wish I could remember the continuous distribution though. Gamma? Dammit...

[Humodour]

I think the reason people are getting so pissed off with Dagon's ignorance is not because he's ignorant, but because he's treating mathematics like religion or politics: some fluffy, up in the clouds thing which is subjective and unique for each individual.

 

It ****ing-well is not. It's objective and well-defined and Dagon is straight-out wrong.

Edited July 17, 2010 by Krezack

[Thorton_AP]

It's become more funny now than anything.

 

What I find most interesting is that, at the beginning of the thread, the probability of the woman in the original post winning 4 lotteries was so tiny that it had to be due to either a scam, or supernatural force. By the end of the thread, the probability of the woman winning 4 lotteries has become 1, because she has won those lotteries.

Edited July 17, 2010 by Thorton_AP

[Tigranes]

Once again, please understand that no matter how convinced YOU are that someone is stupid, that doesn't justify you actually calling them stupid on a public arena.

[Calax]

Dagon... How can no person and somebody win at the same time in one contest?

[Humodour]

No, math doesn't talk about expectations, only probabilities.

 

Um, lol!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value

 

Hahahaha caught out once more, Dagon.

[alanschu]

Another elementary concept of probability theory too.

 

 

As luck would have it, a friend of mine on facebook posted this

 

>.>

<.<

Edited July 17, 2010 by alanschu

[Wrath of Dagon]

No, math doesn't talk about expectations, only probabilities.

 

Um, lol!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value

 

Hahahaha caught out once more, Dagon.

That's not exactly what I meant.

The term "expected value" can be misleading. It must not be confused with the "most probable value." The expected value is in general not a typical value that the random variable can take on. It is often helpful to interpret the expected value of a random variable as the long-run average value of the variable over many independent repetitions of an experiment.

You should know that English is ambiguous.

 

Answer me one question, do you know that the probability of an event that already happened is one? If not, you shouldn't be discussing probabilities and taking a class instead, it's literally the first thing in probability theory.

 

To use alanschu's own example, lets say he brings a bomb with him, and let's say the probability of a bomb is 1 in 1000. The probabilty of there being two bombs planted independently would be 1 in 1000 x 1000, i.e. 1 in a million. But since alanschu already brought the first bomb, its probabilty is actually 1. So now the probability of 2 bombs is 1 in 1 x 1000, i.e. the same as probability of 1 bomb.

Edited July 17, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

No, math doesn't talk about expectations, only probabilities.

 

Um, lol!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value

 

Hahahaha caught out once more, Dagon.

That's not exactly what I meant.

The term "expected value" can be misleading. It must not be confused with the "most probable value." The expected value is in general not a typical value that the random variable can take on. It is often helpful to interpret the expected value of a random variable as the long-run average value of the variable over many independent repetitions of an experiment.

You should know that English is ambiguous.

 

Answer me one question, do you know that the probability of an event that already happened is one? If not, you shouldn't be discussing probabilities and taking a class instead, it's literally the first thing in probability theory.

 

To use alanschu's own example, lets say he brings a bomb with him, and let's say the probability of a bomb is 1 in 1000. The probabilty of there being two bombs planted independently would be 1 in 1000 x 1000, i.e. 1 in a million. But since alanschu already brought the first bomb, its probabilty is actually 1. So now the probability of 2 bombs is 1 in 1 x 1000, i.e. the same as probability of 1 bomb.

And the same thing works with the lotto, so you just proved everyone else right in that the probability of somebody winning a different lottery that is totally independent of the first is the same as winning the first.

[Calax]

I never denied it, you simply don't understand.

Really? You're the one who claimed that winning the lottery a second time was impossible because of the odds, when winning it the first time is proof that it's possible to win, so winning a second time (while a long shot) is still possible, same with a third or a fourth. Or are you going back no the last 10 pages of garbage you've been pitching?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Your previous post was about probabilies, when I answered that your counter argument is something about what's possible at low odds, which has nothing to do with what I commented on.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Tigranes
Troll

[Calax]

Your previous post was about probabilies, when I answered that your counter argument is something about what's possible at low odds, which has nothing to do with what I commented on. You're just completely incapable of logical thought, aren't you?

Odds are odds, low or high there is little difference between them. You've been saying "impossible" and increasing the odds of winning a lottery every time somebody tries again. And yet you just posted in the one I quoted, that somebody doing an independent thing doesn't change the overall odds, which, I believe, is Alans big point for the last five pages.

 

People have the same chance of winning the Lottery (which does happen, it's not "Impossible" like you say) any time they play it, it doesn't jump when they win once like you seem to think that they do.

[Humodour]

*facepalm*

 

He's like a gift that keeps on giving. Except it's a gift your grandmother got you for your 22nd birthday and it's a bit embarrassing and certainly not something you'll ever use.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Nice try at evasion Krezack, you still haven't answered my very simple and direct question.

[Tigranes]

Last chance for the thread.

 

I don't care whether you're right and I can't fix your personality if you're disposed to be arrogant/offensive/whatever, but I'm obliged to deal with any and all trolling and personal attacks, so don't do it guys.

[Tale]

I come back and this is what I find? :'(

[Gorth]

I come back and this is what I find? :'(

Yeah, I've always thought there was something sinister about math. Forget religion and politics, math is the root of all evil

[Humodour]

Nice try at evasion Krezack, you still haven't answered my very simple and direct question.

 

Oh, sorry, which one is that?

 

If it's something silly where you misunderstand probability for the 1000th time in this thread, don't even bother waiting for a reply, though.

[Pidesco]

I come back and this is what I find? :'(

 

 

Isn't it awesome?

 

 

Please, stay.

[Amentep]

I come back and this is what I find? :'(

Yeah, I've always thought there was something sinister about math. Forget religion and politics, math is the root of all evil

 

square root of all evil.

[Walsingham]

I come back and this is what I find? :'(

Yeah, I've always thought there was something sinister about math. Forget religion and politics, math is the root of all evil

 

square root of all evil.

 

LOl'd despite myself.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Nice try at evasion Krezack, you still haven't answered my very simple and direct question.

 

Oh, sorry, which one is that?

 

If it's something silly where you misunderstand probability for the 1000th time in this thread, don't even bother waiting for a reply, though.

So you don't even read what I post, you're just here to insult me, is that it? My simple question (posted right after your post) is whether you know that the probabiltiy of an event which has already happended is 1?

[Hurlshort]

Nice try at evasion Krezack, you still haven't answered my very simple and direct question.

 

Oh, sorry, which one is that?

 

If it's something silly where you misunderstand probability for the 1000th time in this thread, don't even bother waiting for a reply, though.

So you don't even read what I post, you're just here to insult me, is that it? My simple question (posted right after your post) is whether you know that the probabiltiy of an event which has already happended is 1?

 

I'm not math whiz, but that question seems completely illogical.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Why?