Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Proving God Statistically
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 91 of 96 (68865)
11-23-2003 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by DNAunion
11-23-2003 9:13 PM


So?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by DNAunion, posted 11-23-2003 9:13 PM DNAunion has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 92 of 96 (69157)
11-25-2003 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by DNAunion
11-19-2003 11:23 PM


Re: no need to thank me
What language is that written in?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by DNAunion, posted 11-19-2003 11:23 PM DNAunion has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by DNAunion, posted 11-26-2003 9:01 PM Peter has seen this message but not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 93 of 96 (69166)
11-25-2003 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by DNAunion
11-20-2003 11:38 PM


quote:
Depends upon what you are talking about. Life as we know it, or life of any hypothetical kind. Since no ones knows what life of any other kind would be like - exactly what molecules, for example - we can't guess at what molecules and conditions are needed to have it arise.
But if we restrict ourselves to the only kind of life we have empirical observations for, then we have a pretty good idea what is required for life to arise and we have some guestimations - ballpark figures - on the associated probability.
This is one of the many problems with probabalistic arguments
against abiogenesis though.
If you have no idea what other combinations would have resulted
in life (of some kind) then you are only stating the
local probability of life as we know it emerging.
Which is like the number selections -- if you are only
looking for one sequence -- one type of life -- the odds
will look different to looking for any.
Another problem is to do with parallel trials.
Suppose you 140,000,000 people perform the numbered coin
trial simultaneously -- what are the odds that one of the
gets the sequence you are interested in ?
Now have 200,000,000,000,000 people do it ....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by DNAunion, posted 11-20-2003 11:38 PM DNAunion has not replied

  
DNAunion
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 96 (69486)
11-26-2003 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Peter
11-25-2003 7:15 AM


Re: no need to thank me
quote:
What language is that written in?
Visual FoxPro. It's an all-in-one package: programming language (both procedural and object-orientied), relational database management system, form designer, report generator, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Peter, posted 11-25-2003 7:15 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied

  
DNAunion
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 96 (69516)
11-27-2003 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Peter
11-19-2003 2:05 AM


quote:
The flip side is that the number of outcomes that falls within the set of easily recognizable patterns is extremely small: probably not too much larger than the following ...
quote:
What about:
1,1,2,2,1,1,2,2,1,1
for example (or any sequence like it) -- these are possibly generated by the process in question too.
I had read others' posts before writing mine and many of them confused the process by NOT replacing items once selected. I inadvertently carried that method over into my thought processes.
quote:
Therefore, while we should not be surprised to hear that "Frank" hit upon your sequence by chance in a single shot, we should be surprised to hear that "Frank" hit upon the sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 by chance in a single shot (in fact, we should probably reject "Frank"'s claim).
quote:
Pick a sequence in advance (any sequence) and I would be suprised to see it first try no matter what.
The odds of getting one pre-specified result is 1 in 10 billion,
the odds of getting the result you just got is 1 in 1.
*************************************
First, odds and probability are not the same thing. If the probability of event E occurring is P(E) = 0.25 (in other words, 1 in 4 chance), the odds for E are 1:3 (and the odds against E are 3:1).
*************************************
1) The probability of getting one particular pre-specified result is 1 in 10 billion.
2) The probability of getting one particular unspecified result is 1 in 10 billion.
The act of specifying here does not influence the future outcomes, in that, as others stated, the probability of any single outcome is the same as any other: selecting one of them beforehand does not change its probability of occurring - it's probability 1 in 10 billion whether specified or not.
*******************************
1) The probability that any event that did occur did occur is 1 (absolute certainty), no matter how unlikely it was to occur prior to its occurring.
This fact can be misused/misapplied. If I roll 5 dice together one time and get a Yahtzee, is the probability of getting a Yahtzee in a single try 1? No. The probability that I got a Yahtzee in a single try given that I got a Yahtzee in a single try is 1: that's after the fact. It does not change the fact that the probability of getting a Yahtzee in a single try is 1 in 6^4, and that that probability was the case prior to the attempt.
[This message has been edited by DNAunion, 11-27-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Peter, posted 11-19-2003 2:05 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Peter, posted 01-12-2004 10:14 AM DNAunion has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 96 of 96 (77981)
01-12-2004 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by DNAunion
11-27-2003 12:04 AM


quote:
First, odds and probability are not the same thing. If the probability of event E occurring is P(E) = 0.25 (in other words, 1 in 4 chance), the odds for E are 1:3 (and the odds against E are 3:1).
I thought they meant the same, replace 'odds' with 'probability'
then.
quote:
1) The probability of getting one particular pre-specified result is 1 in 10 billion.
2) The probability of getting one particular unspecified result is 1 in 10 billion.
The probability of getting one unspecified result is 1 in 1.
'Particular unspecified result' means specified doesn't it?
If you follow the process you will get a result.
All I was saying is that no result, via the specified process,
is any more likely than any other, so one should not be suprised
from a statistical PoV when a recognisable sequence comes up.
Added by edit:- getting any prespecified sequence (recognisable
or not) first try would be possible, but suspicious.
Most people would be, but that doesn't mean we should be.
Stranger things have happened at sea .... as they say
(not sure who they are, nor what things have happened at sea
that are so strange ...)
[This message has been edited by Peter, 01-12-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by DNAunion, posted 11-27-2003 12:04 AM DNAunion has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024