Home  
NSFW Content 
User Rankings  
Original Content  Channels 
Funny Pictures  Funny Videos 
Funny GIFs  YouTube Videos 
Text/Links  RSS Feeds 
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#507 to #495

AcidFlux (09/29/2012) []
If you flip a coin twice, you have a 75% that at least one of the flips will be heads.
Four possible outcomes (H = Heads, T = Tails)
HT
TH
TT
HH
Ten flips? Then there is a 99.9+% chance that at least one of the flips will result in a heads.
If you are going to use Bill Nye, please get your math right.
Four possible outcomes (H = Heads, T = Tails)
HT
TH
TT
HH
Ten flips? Then there is a 99.9+% chance that at least one of the flips will result in a heads.
If you are going to use Bill Nye, please get your math right.
#619 to #513

AcidFlux (09/29/2012) []
Your original statement was inaccurate. If you flip a coin twice, you have a 50% chance of heads for each flip, not in total. Therefore, if you press the green button twice, you have a 75% chance of the $100 million.
You may have known what you meant, but you explained it improperly. Also, you didn't show that karesokin was wrong in any way. By replying to comment #453, it appeared you were trying to point out a flaw in their logic. There was none. If there is no limit to the number of times the button can be pressed, and no negative consequences for a failure, then there's no reason not to press the green button twice, or even as often as you possible could.
So, in short... I'm still not sure if you were wrong about the math, or that you simply explained it wrong. It boils down to you either making a math error... or sharing a pointless bit of mathematical information that had no relevance to the original comment. Which one is it?
You may have known what you meant, but you explained it improperly. Also, you didn't show that karesokin was wrong in any way. By replying to comment #453, it appeared you were trying to point out a flaw in their logic. There was none. If there is no limit to the number of times the button can be pressed, and no negative consequences for a failure, then there's no reason not to press the green button twice, or even as often as you possible could.
So, in short... I'm still not sure if you were wrong about the math, or that you simply explained it wrong. It boils down to you either making a math error... or sharing a pointless bit of mathematical information that had no relevance to the original comment. Which one is it?
#643 to #626

AcidFlux (09/29/2012) []
Try this: Who has the better chance of winning the lottery: the person that buys one ticket, or the person that buys one hundred tickets? It's the same idea.
If you are allowed to flip a coin multiple times, then your chance of getting a heads, at least ONCE, increases with each flip. It may happen on the first flip or on the 100th flip. All we're looking for is ONE occurrence.
There is no negative consequence for pressing the green button and not getting a positive result. If you are allowed to press it multiple times, then the chance of getting the money increases.
Refer back to my first example of 2 coin flips: HH, TT, TH, HT. Heads appears in 3 of the four possible event sequences. Therefore, there is a 75% that heads will appear, at least once, in a two flip scenario.
In a three flip scenario? 87.5% chance of seeing a heads.
HHH
HHT
HTH
HTT
THH
THT
TTH
TTT
It's like binary code, man. 000,001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111.
What are the chances, in a threeflip series, that the coin will land on tails three times in a row? If you believe it's a 50% chance that it lands on tails three times consecutively, then we need to play a few games of chance together.
If you are allowed to flip a coin multiple times, then your chance of getting a heads, at least ONCE, increases with each flip. It may happen on the first flip or on the 100th flip. All we're looking for is ONE occurrence.
There is no negative consequence for pressing the green button and not getting a positive result. If you are allowed to press it multiple times, then the chance of getting the money increases.
Refer back to my first example of 2 coin flips: HH, TT, TH, HT. Heads appears in 3 of the four possible event sequences. Therefore, there is a 75% that heads will appear, at least once, in a two flip scenario.
In a three flip scenario? 87.5% chance of seeing a heads.
HHH
HHT
HTH
HTT
THH
THT
TTH
TTT
It's like binary code, man. 000,001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111.
What are the chances, in a threeflip series, that the coin will land on tails three times in a row? If you believe it's a 50% chance that it lands on tails three times consecutively, then we need to play a few games of chance together.
#657 to #643

captaindakir (09/29/2012) []
"If you are allowed to flip a coin multiple times, then your chance of getting a heads, at least ONCE, increases with each flip."
The coin doesn't care. No matter how many times you flip, it's 50% chance positive and 50% negative. Purely random chance that does not change.
The coin doesn't care. No matter how many times you flip, it's 50% chance positive and 50% negative. Purely random chance that does not change.
#774 to #657

AcidFlux (09/29/2012) []
Holy **** , how are you not getting this? You are confusing the idea of changes in probability for a single instance with an increase of probability of the occurrence with MULTIPLE instances.
Coin Flip #1: It's 50/50 that it will be heads/tails, for this single instance.
Coin Flip #2: It's 50/50 that it will be heads/tails, for this single instance.
No one is arguing that point. For each, individual instance, the chance is always 50/50. Previous instances have no bearing on future instances.
You seem to think that I'm saying that if coin flip one was tails, then there's an increased probability that coin flip #2 will be heads. WRONG. I never said that.
What I am saying is that the odds of a heads up coin flip, when viewing TWO OR MORE INSTANCES, is increased. Each instance is still it's own, individual event. But taken as a whole, the odds that one will be heads up increases... AS A WHOLE. Not for any one particular event, but for one of the multiples to occur at least one time.
If you SIMULTANEOUSLY flip ten coins, what are the odds that all ten coins will be tails, and NONE will be heads? Answer that, and if you get it right, we can continue.
TEN simultaneous coin flips. All TEN showing the same side.
Coin Flip #1: It's 50/50 that it will be heads/tails, for this single instance.
Coin Flip #2: It's 50/50 that it will be heads/tails, for this single instance.
No one is arguing that point. For each, individual instance, the chance is always 50/50. Previous instances have no bearing on future instances.
You seem to think that I'm saying that if coin flip one was tails, then there's an increased probability that coin flip #2 will be heads. WRONG. I never said that.
What I am saying is that the odds of a heads up coin flip, when viewing TWO OR MORE INSTANCES, is increased. Each instance is still it's own, individual event. But taken as a whole, the odds that one will be heads up increases... AS A WHOLE. Not for any one particular event, but for one of the multiples to occur at least one time.
If you SIMULTANEOUSLY flip ten coins, what are the odds that all ten coins will be tails, and NONE will be heads? Answer that, and if you get it right, we can continue.
TEN simultaneous coin flips. All TEN showing the same side.
#804 to #798

AcidFlux (09/29/2012) []
For any one, individual, specific coin flip, all by itself. Yes. We never disputed that.
But we are talking about looking for a SINGLE occurrence of Heads out of multiple coin flips. Whether we see heads once, twice or fifty times is irrelevant. To satisfy the conditions of our observation, we only needs to see Heads ONCE.
Go get some sleep, come back later and look at what we've been saying. You have been confusing individual probability with multiple probabilities.
But we are talking about looking for a SINGLE occurrence of Heads out of multiple coin flips. Whether we see heads once, twice or fifty times is irrelevant. To satisfy the conditions of our observation, we only needs to see Heads ONCE.
Go get some sleep, come back later and look at what we've been saying. You have been confusing individual probability with multiple probabilities.