• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Higher than "chance"

I sing, therefore I am :)

Uriah Heep "Everything In Life"

It doesn't matter what you say
The cards are in your favour
We don't need no magic ride
To take you far away
Just give it a silent thought
And you will find the power

'Cause everything in life
Will tell you something
Yeah everything in life can set you free

Can you remember a distant dream
That holds your real attention
You don't need a preacher's word
To know what's going on
The secret is all aboard
The wings of your perception

Stand up and fight your troubled mind
Wait no longer
See the power in your life

Disbelievers come on strong
Lost in self importance
They don't know an average man
Can see this mystery
Jump into the twilight world
And gather your awareness
 
Now that this thread appears to be dead -and it was a long time dying - can anybody give me a clue as to why the term "zero probability" was chosen to represent the case of a one of an infinite number of probabilities? I have enough calculus and statistics under my belt (at least I think I do) to have no problem with the mathematical concept represented and to recognise i's validity but, given that infinity is a concept not a number the actual label "zero probability" seems an arbitrary one (which may be true of all labels on a cursory consideration) and furthermore a choice which seems almost tailor-made to give rise to the sort of confusion which was a hallmark of this thread.

edited for poor grammar. Obviously don't have enough of that under my belt.
 
Throg said:
Now that this thread appears to be dead -and it was a long time dying - can anybody give me a clue as to why the term "zero probability" was chosen to represent the case of a one of an infinite number of probabilities?
Click to expand...


Could you point out the post where it was?

The thread is dead because it's gone through the same pattern as almost all other threads I have participated in. Virtually everyone disagrees with me (indeed everyone in this particular instance), no one reaches agreement, no ones opinion has shifted one iota, everyone thinks I'm daft, and me in my turn thinks everyone's stupid. It's the same story again and again and again. These discussions are simply a complete waste of time.
 
Throg said:
Now that this thread appears to be dead -and it was a long time dying - can anybody give me a clue as to why the term "zero probability" was chosen to represent the case of a one of an infinite number of probabilities?
Click to expand...

Because it's provably equal to the number 0.

concept represented and to recognise i's validity but, given that infinity is a concept not a number
Click to expand...

I really hate that phrase. It always sounds to me like "we can't talk about this mathematically, it's just philosophy".

We can talk about infinite sets and limits mathematically, we just don't do arithmetic like 1/infinity.

the actual label "zero probability" seems an arbitrary one
Click to expand...

What name do you give the real number which is not negative and not positive, whose magnitude is smaller than every positive number?

I call it "zero". It's not arbitrary.
 
I suggest that some people need to read this book.
It's rather good at explaining how infinity works and how it has been arrived at in a modern mathematical and scientific way to mean what it means.
 
Interesting Ian said:
Could you point out the post where it was?

The thread is dead because it's gone through the same pattern as almost all other threads I have participated in. Virtually everyone disagrees with me (indeed everyone in this particular instance), no one reaches agreement, no ones opinion has shifted one iota, everyone thinks I'm daft, and me in my turn thinks everyone's stupid. It's the same story again and again and again. These discussions are simply a complete waste of time.
Click to expand...

Can I suggest that we don't have to come to agreement for these threads to have some value. I don't agree with you but I thought you participated in an interesting discussion in an interesting, perhaps even unique way. I enjoyed your contributions, especially your thought experiments even if I did not agree with every step of your reasoning or your conclusions. I think the position you took was incorrect but I don't think you are daft and if everyone else does, so what? I'm sure it's annoying but it's the price one pays for expressing an extraordinary theory regardless of whether the extraordinary theory is valid or not. If we don't test our theories then we can never be sure of their strengths and if we don't test ourselves then we stagnate.
 
rppa said:
I really hate that phrase. It always sounds to me like "we can't talk about this mathematically, it's just philosophy".
Click to expand...

Sorry you hate the phrase but that's really not what it implies. Mathematics is a purely logical discipline - the results of which most certainly have extraordinary practical value - and as such deals in concepts and their logical relationship to one another. And I would never call philosophy "just philosophy".


We can talk about infinite sets and limits mathematically, we just don't do arithmetic like 1/infinity.
Click to expand...

Quite so, I have not implied otherwise.

What name do you give the real number which is not negative and not positive, whose magnitude is smaller than every positive number?
Click to expand...

Yes, that was rather foolish of me and I withdraw the incorrect observation. It remains the case, however, that there is a mis-match between the terms "zero probability" and "possible" in terms of the ordinary meaning of the words. That it is mathematically correct is beyond doubt and it is possible that the conflict merely arises from the similarities of the words and concepts in ordinary language to the correct useage in mathematics, much as a psychologist would be appalled by the everyday useage of the term "paranoid". As I have mentioned, I have no problem with the maths but my brain just hates the juxtaposition of the words "zero probability" and "possible".
 
Ian, have you ever considered what is most likely? That you are right and everyone else are wrong, or that you are wrong and they are right?

When I studied the theory of relativity I thought at first that it didn't make sense. That didn't make me doubt Einstein but rather made me doubt my comprehension of the problem, because I realized that it was much more likely I was wrong and he was right than the opposite.

You ask: "How can something with a probability of zero still happen?"

My answer is that it can't. If it did then you obviously calculated the probability wrong, because the definition of zero probability is that it can't happen.

Either you didn't know all the circumstances that affects the outcome, or you calculated (as earlier) 1/inf = 0.

1/inf is not eq 0.

1/inf ~ 0 for applications were it gives enough accuracy.

Why is it so hard to understand that events with low probablility can happen?

When you get delt a straight flush you say "WOW, that's incredible", but when you get dealt an equally unprobable rubbish hand you won't even notice it. That's because we humans has put a special significance on certain cards.

Compare this with the birth example: The only difference is that you will shout "WOW, that's incredible" on every pair of chromosomes because you obviously put a special significance on your own pair...
 
Give it up, folks. Ian's iantuition trumps facts, logic, advanced understanding of mathematics, and the rules of various card games. If you can't see that, you must be incredibly stupid and as thick as two short planks .

--Terry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom