The name for the point where a probability changes

It could be that one of the possibilities has been resolved as a no-gothat would leave 1 of the 3 remaining as possibilities.alternatively a new possibility can be derived from new information that had not been considered before, and that could take it from 1 in 4 to 1 in 5.what this shows is that the original calculation of the probabilities was in error: it had not properly modeled the {real} situation.probability is just a mathematical model. it is not real, and it does not force any of the probabilities to occur (or not).{{corrected typo in first word}}This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-07-2005 08:03 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

the calculation of probabilities is not real. and the probabilites themselves are not real objects: they are a methematical construction to model the world. they have no effect on what happens, whether you calculate them out to 10 decimals or ignore them.seriously, do you calculate the probability of everything you do before doing it? Can You?no. you cannot calculate the probabilities unless you know the system adequately enough to know what all the possible options are. this is, of course where all those bogus probability calculations get so funny: they cannot know how many other alternatives there are.get real yourself.This message has been edited by RAZD, 12-27-2004 05:33 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

I think I will treasure your post as one of the best examples I've seen of the double-talk dance about an issue without knowing how to address it.clearly you do not understand that {all any probability is made up of} is a mathematical model of the {reality system}. there is no objective reality to probability: it is only an intellectual concept.you can calculate the probability of a coin toss at 50\50 per side, but when you toss the coin you only get one result, and the calculation of the probability of one side or the other has no effect on what side turns up. this is obvious when you toss it again and again: each toss is totally independent of any and all previous tosses -- even if you toss 500 tosses that all end up on the same side the next toss is unaffected.calculation of the probability of something that has already occured is easy to mistake for a measure of reality as well: the probability is 1 - it happened. any other calculation is irrelevant, because there is no way the occurrance can "un-occur"there is also a misunderstanding in {Quantum Mechanics \ Quantum Theory} in dealing with the {uncertainty principle and subatomic particles} -- all the possibilities occur simultaneously until the act of observation alters the system and forces one to be realized. it is not probabilities that occur before that, it is simulaneous co-existence (and out lack of understanding of that).enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you are close. closer than others. once the dice are thrown their result is fixed by the physics. that fact that we do not or cannot know all the factors that go into the final result doesn't change the way they land or any other aspect of the dice throwing gambit.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

heh. you're still struggling Syamsu: Nope. Absolutely and completely wrong. Outcomes happen whether they are probable or not.Think of that coin toss again. If we knew every single little force and subforce and each macro to micro interaction of all the movements and resistances, air currents, etcetera, we could fully and accurately predict the outcome of the toss. Every time.Probabilities are what we use when we don't or can't know all those little squibs and twiggles of the interactions.It is not the outcome that is in question but our ability to understand and predict it.You can make a machine that makes exactly the same motion to flip a coin such that you always get the same result -- there is no question of probability anymore, as the system is sufficiently known to make an adequate prediction.Magicians have learned to do this trick, so it doesn't take rocket science.Mathematical models are not reality, they are models of reality and they are only as good as the information that goes into them.You can think of probability as the measure of uncertainty of our knowledge. Not of the uncertainty of reality.Think about it a bit before rolfing, and you may see the difference.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Do you see me saying it is the only such? No. Several scientific models have feedback systems that allow them to be checked. Mathematical models do not, they exist only in a mental universe, and the correctness of their modeling is irrelevant to both the reality of the system being modeled and the mathematics of the model. My point is to allow you to see that reality and model are not the same thing. We could discuss mobius strips, as another issue where the model is not the mathematical concept.| model < > reality | reality < > model |Probability has no real relationship with reality. This is why the multi-universe scenario is ridiculous. This view takes mathematical probability as being more important than reality: very humorous. Again you are putting words in my mouth I am not saying. I said our incomplete knowledge was because we don’t or can’t know all the variables.The limitation of our ability to know all the variables still does not affect the outcome, just our ability to predict it. That means fallible. That means taking our best guess when we have to. But, again, that guess is not the reality and it has no effect on it: the result will be what it will be. Either Schroeder’s Schroedinger's cat will be alive or it will be dead. Like a child with a new toy, you rush is to use something you don’t fully understand. What is realized is not the occurrence but the prediction of it. When the coin toss ends up heads you can no longer predict an eventuality where it landed on tails. But the result would be the same whether a prediction of heads or tails were made or not. If no prediction is made no prediction is realized. Nothing was determined. Stuff happened, species died. Happens all the time.This shows that you do not understand either the concept of evolution or of probability. I would be careful making comments about ignorance in such a venue. The probability of the meteor striking the earth and wiping out the dinosaurs is 1: we know it happened, therefore we know the system well enough to predict that it happened.Evolution is the sum total of many such catastrophic events and multitudes of lesser events. Or we could just get on with the business of science and study what happens in the natural world, and see if we can find the natural causes for them happening, so that we can reduce if not eliminate our dependence of making calculations of probability. Logic dictates that stuff happens regardless of how probable or improbable it is and especially regardless of whether any intelligence has considered the probability of the events as they happen. And by predeterminist ideologies do you mean fundamentalist religions?Enjoy.{{fixed the cat}}This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-07-2005 08:28 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

No. all that has nothing to do with what is going to happen when: probability only measures inability to predict. there is no realization of any aspect. you need to get over this hurdle you keep stumbling over.Two different people could make different predictions based on their individual knowledge and their own models of reality.Both would be equally valid even though they would place a different probability of X happening.When X happens which probability gets realized? Both.For both to be equally true, there has to be something unreal happening eh?Or the models just don't connect to the real world.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you might try esp #3for the way you want to use it.

the fact that people and all other creatures have and exhibit choices is part of the reasons why the ability to know all the variables is ultimately near impossible.ultimately life is changed by every breath and blink of an eye. the changes happen, there is no anticipation of impending change in the behavior of natural systems.you are juggling with ghosts of concepts.and I have already dissavowed both determinism and multiverse derivatives of an unrealistic and overly probalistic outlook.This message has been edited by RAZD, 12-30-2004 23:09 AM

againit is not "realizations" that take place, it is events. there is no connection between probability and the event.you didn't answer what happens to the "realization" with two different systems and two different probabilities for an event. problem?enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Ah but here is a perfect example. The possibility of having the right answer is exactly the same as before.There is a prize behind one door, and the game-show host knows which one, therefore whichever door you choose there is at least one other that is empty, and he can open that one for stage two of the game.But the prize doesn't move: the reality of the answer is unaffected by any action -- your original choice, the opening of the door and your final choice.Neither is the chance that door number 3 (Jimmy Buffet song) is the correct answer affected by your choice, the opening of the door, the final choice or the reality of where the prize is located. Now lets say that there were actually 5 or even 25 possible options. Both calculations were wrong. And neither affected the outcome. They just have different amounts of {ignorance of the reality} built in.All probability amounts to, is a statement of ignorance of reality. Reality is remarkable unperturbed by such ignorance, as has been amply demonstrated by evolution continuing to occur regardless of whether people believe in it or not — in fact it was doing it for millennia before there were even people to doubt it.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

If you don’t understand the point (which is obvious btw), then how can you judge if it is beside the point? Actually what I am pointing out is that you don’t know how many possibilities to include in any calculation or how to weight them appropriately. And if you did you would be able to predict the real one occurring with a probability of 1.Probability is a measure of your uncertainty, not of reality or any indication for what is going to actually happen.I shot an arrow in the air, and then it fell I know not where ... ... it falls where its trajectory will take it, and the uncertainty certainly does not keep the arrow from falling.Stuff happens, whether it is probable or not.. The prize is behind one door only before any choice is made, and the first choice is irrelevant: it does not move the prize nor does the first open door confirm or reject the choice. The second choice does not move the prize either. The reality is that the prize is behind the door it is behind. The only thing that is ascertained after the last door is opened is whether the prediction based on inadequate information was correct or not. The game-show host has no trouble in predicting which door to open.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

{{edited to correct calculations — with *added statements thus* and wrong statements striken thus}}To begin with your calculation of the different probabilities is wrong, for you are missing (at least) 1/4th of the possibilities. *(I should never do this stuff late at night)*Standard evaluation of the probability of the choices if you always switch: RESULT: correct half *2/3* the time, wrong half *1/3* the time (note that this is the same end result as a calculation of the probability in choosing which of two doors is the correct one: and that earlier I said the first choice is irrelevant ... hmmm) *mea culpa*And now the standard evaluation of the probability of the choices if you always stay with your original choice: RESULT: correct half *1/3* the time, wrong half *2/3* the time the same uncertainty as if you always switch. *mea culpa again*BUTIn none of the cases is the prize moved from one door to another, and in none of the cases does the probability of the choice affect the outcome of the action: it is the action that is the reality regardless of the probability of it being the right one.In not one of these cases is there an inclusion of {contestant evaluates probability before making choice} as a variable in the uncertainty — probability has no affect on reality. When a choice is made, there is no flash of light, no voice from on high, no division of the universe into two parallel universes differing only in the choice made ... or any other single iota of anything significant (observable, measurable), the flight of a butterfly in brazil in unaffected by the choice, there is just a door that gets opened, and either the person walks away with the prize or they don’t.This calculation above also ignores a lot of other factors, like previous outcome, the effect of the audience on the contestant, and the preferences of the contestant for some {numbers\choices} over others or even previous life experiences with choosing doors, or the flight of a butterfly in brazil ... causing a hurricane that hits los angeles and destroys the game studio just before the door gets opened ...... and then there is the effect of lack of choice, such as a person that always chooses door #3 and always stays with door #3 (perhaps he is a Jimmy Buffet fan) — result: right half *1/3* the time, wrong half *2/3* the time. THE SAME RESULT??? Yep. And just as irrelevant to the reality of which door hides the prize. For the same reason. heh.Enjoy. {{OKAY. So I got the probability calculation wrong, that does not change the fact that there is no ***point*** where things are changed by probability, rather they are changed by events that happen --- whether they are probable or not.}}This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-02-2005 10:00 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Is this the declare victory and run from the debate speech?what you have shown is(1) you do not understand probability
(2) you do not understand how probability can and cannot be used
(3) you do not understand that nothing special happensyeah, that's cause to upset the applecart ... especially as the applecart is not resting on the foundation you seem to think it is.enjoy.(fixs typo)This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-01-2005 22:28 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

yes. you do not comprehend. the word meaning is clear when you use the proper definitions: versus affect - something that acts on things
effect - the result of things being acted onand while we are at it lets look up ... So a "realization" of a probability is the point at which we fully, correctly and completely comprehend the result. that's all it is: comprehension of a fact. There is nothing magical that happens, no voice of god, no hand of little green aliens, and no wishes of one person affect the results that is ... finally ... realized in all it's glory as {just exactly what did actually just happen}.something that even people that cannot calculate probability can observe, in fact people that cannot even add can observe the results of a door being opened.and you can try to prove me wrong by demonstrating either (1) that some of the cases I included are invalid or (2) show that there are cases I did not include. take your time. you've been hasty already, and I wouldn't want to rush you.perhaps you might learn something. maybe. maybe not. which door, eh?you have a 50-50 choice.enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}