Probability
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-03-2013, 02:41 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 02:33 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 02:14 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I don't think our beliefs on this are that far apart, rather we are quibbling on the words we use. You want to say probabilities are descriptions we use to make predictions, and I say they are tools we use to make predictions.
No. I am not saying that probabilities are descriptions we use to make predictions. I am saying that statistics and probabilities are descriptions of observations. We then use our observations to discern what may or may not be likely in the future or in the past. But we have no way of verifying it without direct observation of it being true, and no way of ever verifying it to be 100% false.

If I flip a true coin 1 trillion times, I can be certain that about half a trillion results will be heads, and the other half trillion will be tails. It is logically possible though that all 1 trillion flips could result in heads. That result is so unlikely that I can just dismiss it for all practical purposes.

Now suppose I did have 1 trillion heads in a row. What is the more likely expaination? Happenstance or a double headed coin?

If you say 'a double headed coin' then you just used probability to explain a result you've observed in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 05:00 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 12:44 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Star crash, If an atheist says to me he is very skeptical of a claim of a miracle simply on the basis that all other miracles he's looked at turned out to have natural expkainations, I cannot take exception to his reasoning.

The marble example was employed to show that the reasoning of the atheist is correct.

I'm not trying to prove miracles, but rather show this line of thinking isn't flawed. I will use this line of thinking in another thread.

Cool. I wish you'd get around to it, because this probability talk is boring. Even though I passionately love math, it feels pointless -- even if you convinced the atheists here (or they convinced you) of the different points-of-view on probability, that wouldn't change anyone's worldview one whit. So I haven't joined in to try to correct anyone's perspective on probability, and I still don't plan to do it. Anyone who wants education on how probability works can get free lessons from Khan Academy.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 05:10 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 02:41 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 02:33 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  No. I am not saying that probabilities are descriptions we use to make predictions. I am saying that statistics and probabilities are descriptions of observations. We then use our observations to discern what may or may not be likely in the future or in the past. But we have no way of verifying it without direct observation of it being true, and no way of ever verifying it to be 100% false.

If I flip a true coin 1 trillion times, I can be certain that about half a trillion results will be heads, and the other half trillion will be tails. It is logically possible though that all 1 trillion flips could result in heads. That result is so unlikely that I can just dismiss it for all practical purposes.

Now suppose I did have 1 trillion heads in a row. What is the more likely expaination? Happenstance or a double headed coin?

If you say 'a double headed coin' then you just used probability to explain a result you've observed in reality.
How about this....just say what you want to say or shut the fuck up. This is getting pointless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 06:08 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 12:53 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 12:36 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  And yet, you're still wrong. The likelihood that all the marbles are white is not a function of your draws. It only describes what you have drawn from the bin.

Yes it is a function of the draws because as you draw white marbles, the number of possible ways the bin can contain a black marble(s) decreases. I gave a simple example that clearly showed this. If I am wrong then point out the flaw in that example. Just saying I am wrong isn't helpful.

No and no.

Black swans.

It was thought that all swans were white as a black swan had never been seen.

Then black swans were discoverd in Australia. The probability of a black swan went from near 0 to certainty?

No, the probability did not change, just the perception.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
14-03-2013, 07:51 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 06:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 12:53 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Yes it is a function of the draws because as you draw white marbles, the number of possible ways the bin can contain a black marble(s) decreases. I gave a simple example that clearly showed this. If I am wrong then point out the flaw in that example. Just saying I am wrong isn't helpful.

No and no.

Black swans.

It was thought that all swans were white as a black swan had never been seen.

Then black swans were discoverd in Australia. The probability of a black swan went from near 0 to certainty?

No, the probability did not change, just the perception.

Yes the probability of black swans went from near 0 to 1. Sometimes that happens.

If you are claiming my example does not show that the probability of all the marbles being white is an increasing function of drawing only white marbles, then perhaps you can point out the flaw in the example I provided.

Jakel is the only one so far who has attempted to show anything wrong with the example. I disagree with his criticism but told him I wasn't going to quibble about it since even if his criticism is correct the example still makes my point.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 07:56 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 07:51 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 06:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  No and no.

Black swans.

It was thought that all swans were white as a black swan had never been seen.

Then black swans were discovered in Australia. The probability of a black swan went from near 0 to certainty?

No, the probability did not change, just the perception.

Yes the probability of black swans went from near 0 to 1. Sometimes that happens.

If you are claiming my example does not show that the probability of all the marbles being white is an increasing function of drawing only white marbles, then perhaps you can point out the flaw in the example I provided.

Jakel is the only one so far who has attempted to show anything wrong with the example. I disagree with his criticism but told him I wasn't going to quibble about it since even if his criticism is correct the example still makes my point.

No, the probability did not change. There were always black swans. What changed was perception.

You are confusing the perception with the reality.

With no information about the population of balls, no probabilities can be calculated. You can guess, but you can not calculate.

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
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
14-03-2013, 08:24 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 07:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  With no information about the population of balls, no probabilities can be calculated. You can guess, but you can not calculate.
That's exactly what I told him in a PM I sent him one week ago. His response was that he currently doesn't know how to explain why he doesn't need to calculate the exact probabilities to show that they are in/decreasing, but that he will think about it for a couple of days and report back to me in case he comes up with anything.

Well, I'm still waiting. Drinking Beverage

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
14-03-2013, 08:33 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 08:24 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 07:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  With no information about the population of balls, no probabilities can be calculated. You can guess, but you can not calculate.
That's exactly what I told him in a PM I sent him one week ago. His response was that he currently doesn't know how to explain why he doesn't need to calculate the exact probabilities to show that they are in/decreasing, but that he will think about it for a couple of days and report back to me in case he comes up with anything.

Well, I'm still waiting. Drinking Beverage

My example answers your criticism. It works for any finite number of marbles. It shows that as you draw white marbles, you eliminate possible ways the bin can have black ones. If every possible arrangement is equally likely at the start of the drawing process, then as you decrease the possibilities for the existence of black marbles, it increases the probability of the remaining possibilities, including the possibility that only white marbles exist in the bin.

Show why my example is flawed Vosur.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 08:55 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 08:33 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Show why my example is flawed Vosur.

Chas already did. Your ignoring it, like every other rebuttal that appears in your threads. I suggest you take some math courses before trying to base a argument on probabilities.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 09:11 PM
RE: Probability
(14-03-2013 08:33 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  My example answers your criticism. It works for any finite number of marbles. It shows that as you draw white marbles, you eliminate possible ways the bin can have black ones. If every possible arrangement is equally likely at the start of the drawing process, then as you decrease the possibilities for the existence of black marbles, it increases the probability of the remaining possibilities, including the possibility that only white marbles exist in the bin.

Show why my example is flawed Vosur.
I forgive you your lack of acknowledgment of previous responses. Smartass

I reiterate:

Vosur Wrote:You cannot say that either of these events have this and that probability when you don't know how many white (and possibly colored) marbles there are.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: