Take the case of one die. A mathematical theory would predict that the probability of a six turning up is 1/6 precisely as Max and Zak would claim. But why use this theory. Why not base probability on what happens as a matter of fact.
If u throw the die just 60 times and it comes up six all the time, on the frequency theory the probabililty would be 60/60 or 1. Only an idiot or God would not bet on the six turning up--assuming a six will not turn up.. If it happened 600 times only an imbecile would think the probability on the next throw was 1/6. And if it happened 6000 times then only Zak and Max or would think the probablility was 1/6. You people are like NC economists wedded to math models that have no connection to reality in situations like this.
Ok blast me. I dont know much about probability...
Cheers, Ken Hanly
----- Original Message ----- From: Max Sawicky <sawicky at bellatlantic.net> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 7:33 AM Subject: RE: Civil Liberties
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Zak McGregor
> Well at least you'll be right once
> in your life.
>
> You explained it right, but Luke is
> channeling wisdom from a higher power.
>
> mbs
>
> Actually, this is probably the only time I'll ever say this: Max is
> quite correct. The previous million rolls have no outcome on the fate of
> the next roll. Why? Well, because the chance of throwing 1 six is,
> unsuprisingly 1/6 (1 in 6). To do it twice is (1/6)^2, or 1/6*6 or 1/36.
> To roll a million consecutive sixes then is (1/6)^1 000 000. However,
> the next roll is still 1/6. The probability of getting 1 000 001 rolls
> of six in a row is (1/36)^1 000 001, but what we need to take into
> consideration is that you've already "used" (ie beaten the odds) on the
> first 1 000 000 throws. I hope I explained that OK... ;-/
>
> Cheers
>
> Zak