Things that are true that you dont believe

hank scorpio89

valoren wrote: »

Scorpio!
He'll sting you with his dreams, of power and wealth.
Beware of... Scorpio!

Ever seen a man say goodbye to his shoes ??

Captain Chaos

Glenster wrote: »

Thats a good way of thinking about it but is wrong on almost every point of fact.

How so... it's the simple dots on a balloon being inflated analogy. There are stars now slipping beyond our visible horizon yet they exist. Over time, more and more starts and galaxies will slip over too until all we are left with is the birth spawn of the Milky and Andromeda galaxies to look at.

hank scorpio89

DavyD_83 wrote: »

That Pi never repeats itself, how can you have infinite arrangements of a finite number of digits (1-9).

Also, that the odds of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 coming up in the Lotto are the exact same as the odds of any other random specific set of numbers.
I don't play the lotto, mostly because I'm very aware of how long the odds are, but if I did, I'm never picking the first consecutive set of numbers, or any other consecutive set.

Oh my god thank you this is one we debated in the pub a long while ago .theres no way theres the same odds !!!gotta be less likely they will come up in a row !!!!

quickbeam

osarusan wrote: »

That three cup shuffle thing where you guess one from A, B, and C, (say you guess and the person turns over another cup to show it's not holding anything (say C) and then asks you if you want to switch your original guess-apparently it is better in terms of probability to switch. Maths says so, but I have no idea why and am intuitively against it.

The Monty Hall Problem. You're twice as likely to win if you change your mind than if you stick by your original choice.

My thing that I don't believe is this: if you wrap a rope around the Earth at its equator, pulling it tight, then you would need only 6.3m extra length of rope to have the rope hover 1 meter off the ground all the way around. It's true, but I still don't believe it.

filbert the fox

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

Oh my god thank you this is one we debated in the pub a long while ago .theres no way theres the same odds !!!gotta be less likely they will come up in a row !!!!

Last Saturday's main draw saw 36, 37 & 38 come out. The whole purpose of the lottery's scrutineer is to allow any sequence of events including 1 2 3 4 5 6

seamus

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

Oh my god thank you this is one we debated in the pub a long while ago .theres no way theres the same odds !!!gotta be less likely they will come up in a row !!!!

The odds of them coming up in a row is a different question than the odds of them coming up.

You don't play the lotto based on the order that the numbers will come up, just the set of six numbers that come up.

The likelihood of the numbers coming out 1,2,3,4,5,6 is less than the six numbers coming out in any order.

However those six numbers coming out in any order is exactly the same odds as any other six numbers coming out in any order.

Also, the numbers coming out in the order 1,2,3,4,5,6 is exactly the same as 21,33,5,1,24,12 coming out in exactly that order.

The only reason you shouldn't put 1,2,3,4,5,6 on your lotto ticket is because if you do win you'll have to share the win with a few hundred other people who play those numbers for the craic.

scamalert

quickbeam wrote: »

The Monty Hall Problem. You're twice as likely to win if you change your mind than if you stick by your original choice.

My thing that I don't believe is this: if you wrap a rope around the Earth at its equator, pulling it tight, then you would need only 6.3m extra length of rope to have the rope hover 1 meter off the ground all the way around. It's true, but I still don't believe it.

was going to post on same topic how is it chance increase in pickings doors,when starting person has a chance of 1/3 ,and if unlucky chance is 50/50 unless someone gives definite hint which door hold what,thus its just f king with ones brain,but actual odds remain 1/2 not 2/3 or 1/3.

rope one is easy to test take a pint glass or a cup tie string along brim then take of measure and add tiny % not sure whats earth waste size,but it would give you that extra space,just maths.same trick could be applied by measuring glass rim,and putting extra items on top of glass and string would still be longer then whole glass.

edit:tried to post but got captcha button on boards.ie some crap going on ?wasted all post.

Ubbquittious

Aliens. They might have landed in Roswell and all of that sh1te but I don't think they're there at all. Space beyond our planet is just a disappointing collection of rocks and fiery balls of fire

filbert the fox

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Aliens. They might have landed in Roswell and all of that sh1te but I don't think they're there at all. Space beyond our planet is just a disappointing collection of rocks and fiery balls of fire

What's disappointing about that - most tourist sites around the world are a collection of rocks in the form of ruins and as for volcanoes...goodness gracious

Glenster

Captain Chaos wrote: »

How so... it's the simple dots on a balloon being inflated analogy.

because it's a simple analogy.

Banjo

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

Oh my god thank you this is one we debated in the pub a long while ago .theres no way theres the same odds !!!gotta be less likely they will come up in a row !!!!

The chances of 1,2,3,4,5,6 coming up (in any order) are the same as any other specific set of 6 numbers coming up.

Where you have trouble accepting it is that the chances of 1,2,3,4,5,6 coming up versus any set of 6 numbers that aren't 1,2,3,4,5,6 are astronomical, and that's what your brain is seeing even if it's not the problem you're looking at.

Unless I've got it completely wrong as well, in which case... is there room on the broom for a failed mathematician like me?

GhostyMcGhost

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

Thanks for the warm welcome back 😉

When you go home there'll be another story on your house

silverharp

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

Oh my god thank you this is one we debated in the pub a long while ago .theres no way theres the same odds !!!gotta be less likely they will come up in a row !!!!

just think of the balls as 36 random colours then , the fact that they happen to have numbers is not relevant. Its not like the balls or the machine know their place in the universe.:pac:

whiskeyman

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This is fuddled my melty brain since I was a kid!

seamus

Banjo wrote: »

The chances of 1,2,3,4,5,6 coming up (in any order) are the same as any other specific set of 6 numbers coming up.

Where you have trouble accepting it is that the chances of 1,2,3,4,5,6 coming up versus any set of 6 numbers that aren't 1,2,3,4,5,6 are astronomical, and that's what your brain is seeing even if it's not the problem you're looking at.

Unless I've got it completely wrong as well, in which case... is there room on the broom for a failed mathematician like me?

It's actually one of the most common misconceptions around probability theory. We tend to be conditioned early on in life that when X happens once, that means that X is less likely to happen in the future (gambler's fallacy).

For most practical applications, this tends to be true because it applies to complicated systems like the weather. In fact there's a specific part of probability theory - regression to the mean - which deals with cases where something becomes more (or less) likely the more frequently it occurs.
So when you've had two great summers in a row, there's a good chance the next one won't be as good. When a good sports team has beaten an equally good sports team twice in a row, it's likely they won't win a third time. And so forth. Because these are complicated, multi-factorial systems where the last outcome affects the next.

But when dealing with simple systems and purely numerical probability, such as a lotto or coin flips, that all goes out the window. What happened the last time has no relation or effect on the next time. So when the lotto machine has already picked out 1,2,3,4 & 5 as the first five numbers, it is no more or less likely that 6 will come out than any other number.

If you have flipped 50 "heads" in a row, the chance of the next flip being heads is still 50:50. But our brains don't want to believe that's true, because we've evolved in a world where purely numerical probabilities don't really occur in nature. Interestingly one of the few places it does occur in nature is in child bearing. Having 20 daughters doesn't make it more likely that number 21 will be a boy, but very few people will accept that.

ablelocks

Leitrim.

Maximus Alexander

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Or (and I can never come up with the language to quite express this properly) with all of those consciousnesses floating around in the world, how did I come to be one of them? How did I end up with a perspective on this world after an eternity of not having one? Why now? Why here? In this body? Where the actual fuck did I come from? How many unique consciousnesses are possible, and what were the mind boggling odds that I just randomly got to experience one of them?

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

If you have flipped 50 "heads" in a row, the chance of the next flip being heads is still 50:50.

True S, but in a perfect world where the flip is truly random. In reality, if a coin was flipped 50 "heads" in a row the probability is there that it is not random and the chances are higher that it'll come up heads the 51st time(though with each flip the probability of "tails" likely increases also)

.......

This post has been deleted.

fiachr_a

Can't believe Echo and the Bunnymen recorded their first (and best) album Crocodiles when they were only 20 or 21. F--- this Facebook generation!

NIMAN

Birneybau wrote: »

To go along with this, everything is mostly nothing at an atomic level, so, everything is mostly empty space. You can never truly touch anything.

I was doing some reading recently on this atomic level stuff, and as you say nothing ever touches anything else. This I found hard to grasp. I was wondering if the edges of any surface have spinning electrons etc, why don't they bang into ones they come into contact with.

then I did the reading, and apparently 2 surfaces never touch, there is always a tiny gap between them. So the chair I am sitting on, I'm not actually sitting in it, I am hovering slightly about it.

Weird.

steddyeddy

NIMAN wrote: »

That everything is made up of tiny particles that have other tiny particles floating around them.

Anytime I try to look at things in life, just plain old normal things, like making tea with a tea bag, or me typing this on a PC, looking at the characters on the screen, the person sitting opposite me, my hands etc......thats its all made up of atoms, molecules, protons, electrons etc etc.

Baffling.

I study molecules for a living. I'm a collection of molecules studying other molecules.

Birneybau

steddyeddy wrote: »

NIMAN wrote: »

That everything is made up of tiny particles that have other tiny particles floating around them.

Anytime I try to look at things in life, just plain old normal things, like making tea with a tea bag, or me typing this on a PC, looking at the characters on the screen, the person sitting opposite me, my hands etc......thats its all made up of atoms, molecules, protons, electrons etc etc.

Baffling.

I study molecules for a living. I'm a collection of molecules studying other molecules.

And if you had an extremely sharp tweezers and took yourself apart molecule by molecule, all that would be left would be a pile of non concious dust.

Yourself isit

filbert the fox wrote: »

Last Saturday's main draw saw 36, 37 & 38 come out. The whole purpose of the lottery's scrutineer is to allow any sequence of events including 1 2 3 4 5 6

They don't have to come out in order to be displayed in order. The balls can come out 3,5,1,4,6,2 and you will win with 1,2,3,4,5,6. And that's what they show on the TV banner at the end. An ascending sequence.

There are in fact 6! (6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x2 x1) ways those numbers can come out.

It's understandable why people think the sequence isn't as likely aa others because if you think you have to get 1,2,3,4,5,6 and the balls have to come out in that order then it is 6! more unlikely.

But they don't.

Filmer Paradise

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Still can't believe Trump is president

And a lot of people here would vote FF if there were an election in the morning.

Why?

NIMAN

Talking about things that make you think, I often wondered if I hear a song or piece of music exactly as you do?

Or if I see a colour exactly the same as you?

clairewithani

NIMAN wrote: »

Talking about things that make you think, I often wondered if I hear a song or piece of music exactly as you do?

Or if I see a colour exactly the same as you?

I often think of the colour one.

messinkiapina

Trump. Proof positive for me that the multiverse and the many worlds theory are absolutely real, and that I've recently branched off into some statistically freakish corner of the multiverse.

4068ac1elhodqr

Deleted User wrote: »

That people prefer physical torture than to be bored.

Kind of, but maybe more accurate to say 'humans enjoy consistency and inconsistency' in near equal measure.

This is why the vast majority of folks (at some point in time), have chosen to watch the same movie, at least twice.

On the repeat viewing they will know (from experience) that its worth watching. But also they are also very much hoping that most if it has been forgotten, so to add an element of surprise and suspense.

4068ac1elhodqr

filbert the fox wrote: »

Last Saturday's main draw saw 36, 37 & 38 come out. The whole purpose of the lottery's scrutineer is to allow any sequence of events including 1 2 3 4 5 6

I'd give 36,37,38 a very slight (0.07%) bias advantage over 1,2,3.... Mainly due to 'slippy heavy balls' theory. That is: The balls with a higher surface area of paint application will be heavier, and with slightly less surface friction, than the smaller numbers. Other than that more or less same chance.