Breaking the spell?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-04-2015, 02:40 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:28 PM)TurkeyBurner Wrote:  What are the odds?

In a tiny neighborhood of about a dozen homes, there are four households, including mine, that the husbands all share the same first name. Of those four households, the wives of three of them all have the same first name. The one where the wife's first name is different happens to be my particular household. But, wait! There is more!... My wife, who doesn't share the same first name as the other three wives of the husbands that share my name, just happens to have been born on the same exact day (day, month, year) as one of those three wives.

Uncanny!!

Four guys called Turkey????

Baby, I'm amazed. Evil_monster
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jockmcdock's post
24-04-2015, 02:41 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:26 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:17 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yet, you were able to say that if you were able to rewind 5 minutes, you'd have a very good chance of not throwing a 6 at all?

Actually it was a double 6.

Yes, if i were able to go back 5 minutes to re-roll the dice, my chance of a double 6 is still 1 in 36.

I don't see the problem. Are you saying everything is predetermined? if i can rewind my throw 100 times, will I get 100 double 6's?

No, but the chances of a double 6 occurring if you were able to rewind it 5 minutes, is unlikely, far from a bet worth taking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 02:45 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:26 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  Actually it was a double 6.

Yes, if i were able to go back 5 minutes to re-roll the dice, my chance of a double 6 is still 1 in 36.

I don't see the problem. Are you saying everything is predetermined? if i can rewind my throw 100 times, will I get 100 double 6's?

No, but the chances of a double 6 occurring if you were able to rewind it 5 minutes, is unlikely, far from a bet worth taking.

Sorry, I don't get your point. What if my stake is $1 but if I throw double 6 I get $1000. I'd take that bet every day.

But you are moving away from your point about considering probabilities retrospectively.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 02:54 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:18 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  But it was guaranteed that it would turn out some way, and this is the way we got.

This is start. It was guaranteed that it would turn out some way? But not guarnteed that it would be be, conscious life, rational, moral, creative agents, aware of their existence, capable of uncovering how they came to be?

It could have all just as likely turned out to be a bunch of shrubs?

We don't know enough to say it was just as likely, but we can say that it could have.

There might have been no animals, or animals but no mammals, or no red flowers, or insects might have four legs instead of six, or snakes might not exist, or ...
The possibilities are vast.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 02:58 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:45 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  No, but the chances of a double 6 occurring if you were able to rewind it 5 minutes, is unlikely, far from a bet worth taking.

Sorry, I don't get your point. What if my stake is $1 but if I throw double 6 I get $1000. I'd take that bet every day.

But you are moving away from your point about considering probabilities retrospectively.

To me saying that if you rewound the events 5 minutes prior, that you would have been unlikely to roll a double 6, is considering probabilities retrospectively. You're applying the same sort of reasoming here, that you're claiming I can't do.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 03:06 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 02:58 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:45 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  Sorry, I don't get your point. What if my stake is $1 but if I throw double 6 I get $1000. I'd take that bet every day.

But you are moving away from your point about considering probabilities retrospectively.

To me saying that if you rewound the events 5 minutes prior, that you would have been unlikely to roll a double 6, is considering probabilities retrospectively. You're applying the same sort of reasoming here, that you're claiming I can't do.

Complete and utter bullshit. I'm saying that my chance of rolling a double 6 5 minutes ago was 1 in 36. Whether i achieved it or not is not relevant. If i achieved it, the probability that I rolled a double 6 (past tense) is 1. If i didn't, the probability was 0.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 03:18 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 03:06 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 02:58 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  To me saying that if you rewound the events 5 minutes prior, that you would have been unlikely to roll a double 6, is considering probabilities retrospectively. You're applying the same sort of reasoming here, that you're claiming I can't do.

Complete and utter bullshit. I'm saying that my chance of rolling a double 6 5 minutes ago was 1 in 36.

How is this not you reiterating what I just said? The only difference being your 1/36 chance of rolling 6s, is referred to as unlikely as rolling 6s? And instead of 5 minutes prior, it's referred to as retrospectively.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 03:18 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 03:06 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  Complete and utter bullshit. I'm saying that my chance of rolling a double 6 5 minutes ago was 1 in 36.

How is this not you reiterating what I just said? The only difference being your 1/36 chance of rolling 6s, is referred to as unlikely as rolling 6s?

Because if i CAN rewind history, I get a 1 in 36 chance.

But here's the rub...I can't rewind history. i really can't. My chance of double 6 BEFORE the throw was 1 in 36. The probability AFTER the throw was 1 (I did it) or 0 (I didn't).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 03:23 PM)jockmcdock Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 03:18 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  How is this not you reiterating what I just said? The only difference being your 1/36 chance of rolling 6s, is referred to as unlikely as rolling 6s?

But here's the rub...I can't rewind history. i really can't.

Who asked you to rewind history? All that matters is that you can think as if history were rewound regarding the question. And say things such as, if I could rewind history it's unlikely (1/36) that you would have thrown double 6s
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 03:40 PM
RE: Breaking the spell?
(24-04-2015 03:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Who asked you to rewind history?

What a zinger!!!!

(24-04-2015 03:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  All that matters is that you can think as if history were rewound regarding the question. And say things such as, if I could rewind history it's unlikely (1/36) that you would have thrown double 6s

Em...are you asking me to rewind history?

And, yeah, if i could rewind history, my chance of double 6s is 1/36. You got a problem with that?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: