My first thread in over a year

[RagnaToad]

1. There are also many differences between one coin and another. Substance, shape, weight to name a few.

2. I said "basically", and yes, basically, that IS what your saying.

3. This thread wasn't about whether a coin can be forged or not anyway. It was about a theoretical coin with 2 possible outcomes, heads and tails. But I just couldn't let you say things about a coin being unforgeable... A coin isn't any different from any other object that could be somewhat modified to achieve a certain physical effect. And I'm not just talking about chance games.

I guess I'll let you think what you want. Ignorance is bliss...

Bless you!

[Autumn]

In reality you still have a 49.9/100% chance of getting heads. You honestly don't have a true 50/50 chance seeing there is the third side to the coin which is sides.

So on average you have a 49.9% chance that it will be heads and the same of it being tales with a .2% chance that it will mystically land on its side.

The logical explination of this is the fact that you are flipping the coin so even if you some how weighted either side of the coin to "help" improve apon your statistic the outcome is still the same a 49.9% chance. Angles, deflection, and leveling have nothing and everything to do with the pure luck of the draw. You flip it so by shear volume mass you have statiscly screwed yourself into giving yourself this percentage. Now if you rolled the coin then your percentages would change drastically if the coin was weighted to one side but this is not the case.

Of course if the coin is duel sided the you still have the chance that it would land on its side, which would be .2%. Unless this coin that we have "no prior knowledge of" has a face of .032 and a width (side) of 3 inches. Then statistically it would almost always land on its side.

Limiting your question shows nothing and will also help to proove nothing. By doing this even if someone was to guess the correct responce you could still say "no" and change your secnario to suit your favor.

You're the one who doesn't understand statistics.

"49.9/100%"? I hope you can see the mistake here.

Yes, there is a chance that a coin will land on its side when flipped, but as I said before this probability is almost surely 0. Not your arbitrarily chosen 0.2% of landing on its side. The proof is an appeal to the Strong law of large numbers.

In fact, your third paragraph seems to be alluding to the Strong law of large numbers. However, your use of language is so incoherent I have difficulty recognizing your argument. I'll assume you're telling me that if the probability of getting heads is 50% and you flip the coin then the probability is 50%. Yes, tautology is tautologous.

Did you even read my explanation? The only "limits" I'm placing are that this coin has a heads and tails side, with a probability unknown to you of getting heads on a flip. Again, I'll say the chance of the coin landing on the side is almost surely 0. There's no other trick involved, like rolling the coin. What you seem unable to grasp is that situation involves the coin already being flipped once and you have seen that outcome to be heads.

You don't know the true probability of getting heads. You do know that probability by definition lies in the [0,1] range. The intuition to solving this problem is that for any given probability, p, you can flip the coin N number of times but when you flip the coin and you get tails the first time then you as good as discard this result because you have the knowledge that the first outcome has to be heads. For low values of getting heads (p) you'll be discarding more results, so your average or expected probability of getting heads must be over 50%. If you formally do the mathematics you'll get the result of 2/3.

[Meier Link]

1. There are also many differences between one coin and another. Substance, shape, weight to name a few.

Wow statement of the year, that is a given. But in a realisitc world making one side ever so slightly heavier then another will not affect the outcome. Like I said if you over power one side in a flip if it manages to hit heavy side up the heavy side will force the light side down and vise versa.

2. I said "basically", and yes, basically, that IS what your saying.

Umm no, once again you are trying to put words into my mouth, which prooves nothing.

3. This thread wasn't about whether a coin can be forged or not anyway. It was about a theoretical coin with 2 possible outcomes, heads and tails. But I just couldn't let you say things about a coin being unforgeable... A coin isn't any different from any other object that could be somewhat modified to achieve a certain physical effect. And I'm not just talking about chance games.

Umm actually you need to reread the OP, the whole thread is based off of an endless possiblilities of coins and scenarios. The only common factor is the fact that the coin is flipped. And no there is not just 2 possibilites, that is where a one track frame of mind comes into play. There are 3 possiblilities. The OP never limited it down to 2. Guess you aren't reading enough into it.

I guess I'll let you think what you want. Ignorance is bliss...

Bless you!

This coming from someones who aruges the validity of toast, kudos for making an ass out of yourself.

You're the one who doesn't understand statistics.

"49.9/100%"? I hope you can see the mistake here.

Yes, there is a chance that a coin will land on its side when flipped, but as I said before this probability is almost surely 0. Not your arbitrarily chosen 0.2% of landing on its side. The proof is an appeal to the Strong law of large numbers.

You completely contradict yourself here.

In fact, your third paragraph seems to be alluding to the Strong law of large numbers. However, your use of language is so incoherent I have difficulty recognizing your argument.

It's called English, even Ragna can understand it and if I remember correctly that is not even his main language.

I'll assume you're telling me that if the probability of getting heads is 50% and you flip the coin then the probability is 50%. Yes, tautology is tautologous.

Never said the chances are 50 / 50.

Did you even read my explanation? The only "limits" I'm placing are that this coin has a heads and tails side, with a probability unknown to you of getting heads on a flip. Again, I'll say the chance of the coin landing on the side is almost surely 0. There's no other trick involved, like rolling the coin. What you seem unable to grasp is that situation involves the coin already being flipped once and you have seen that outcome to be heads.

No you actually put no clarity into your OP, you just said I have a coin I flip it then you guess what the outcomes are even though you have no clue about anything else (terrain, coin, weather, wind)

You don't know the true probability of getting heads. You do know that probability by definition lies in the [0,1] range. The intuition to solving this problem is that for any given probability, p, you can flip the coin N number of times but when you flip the coin and you get tails the first time then you as good as discard this result because you have the knowledge that the first outcome has to be heads. For low values of getting heads (p) you'll be discarding more results, so your average or expected probability of getting heads must be over 50%. If you formally do the mathematics you'll get the result of 2/3.

Once again you contradict your self, you give an A / B responce when the are 3 plausible outcomes. Like I said you can make a 100 different outcomes, which ever suits your needs.

[RagnaToad]

You obviously are not a person who can discuss about such matters without getting all worked up, claiming the other one puts "words in his mouth" and saying the other one is making a fool out of himself because of the use of a certain example. You also can't seem to grasp the idea of a coin flipped 1.000.000 times landing more than 500.000 times on the heavy side...

Retorical question: Are you afraid that the world doesn't make sense anymore if a coin isn't 50/50?

I sincerely hope you're justing joking around to see how people would react, and if so, I'll be the first one to say "good one!". But for now, I'll leave it at that.

BTW, what do you mean with "even" I understand?

[Meier Link]

You obviously are not a person who can discuss about such matters without getting all worked up, claiming the other one puts "words in his mouth" and saying the other one is making a fool out of himself because of the use of a certain example. You also can't seem to grasp the idea of a coin flipped 1.000.000 times landing more than 500.000 times on the heavy side...

Actually I can, you are the one getting worked up. I have had alot of debates on this forum. All I did was call it like I see it, in which you where trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say to suit your own argument.

Retorical question: Are you afraid that the world doesn't make sense anymore if a coin isn't 50/50?

I'll leave it at that.

Are you to blind to see that it is not a 50 / 50 chance? It does not exsist unless you are speaking in the dealings of a 2-d object, which you are not. A coin no matter what the size, shape, wieght, has three sides. Making a 50/ 50 outcome impossible because there is a chance (no matter how small) the coin can land on it's edge.

[RagnaToad]

There you go involving "the edge" again.

We're not talking about the possibility of a coin falling on the rim. I was just pointing out the whole time that you can have an influence on a coin's outcome by modifying it in some way, and thus altering its statistics of giving tails.

While you were saying that it's not possible because "it is a coin". O_o

[Meier Link]

There you go involving "the edge" again.

We're not talking about the possibility of a coin falling on the rim. I was just pointing out the whole time that you can have an influence on a coin's outcome by modifying it in some way, and thus altering its statistics of giving tails.

While you were saying that it's not possible because "it is a coin". O_o

I never said it was not possible to affect a coin, I am saying the alterations only change the weight not the over all plausible outcome. And yes the edge of the coin comes into play, quit trying to discredit it. There is a chance of it landing on edge. If you take away the chance of hitting on an edge and landing on it then the question all together is bull shit seeing you are trying to eliminate a side that is there. And yes the OP leaves it open to falling on the edge. It asked what was the possiblity of it hitting on the head side again, leaving tails and edge open. So no you do not have a 50/50 chance. You have a 3 way ratio.

If the OP wanted it to be strictly head side and tail side it should of said so but it did not. Even then it ask about a statistic, which are not fact.

Then again I am not saying I am speaking facts (for the most part) only statistics.

[RagnaToad]

For the last time, I'm not talking about the possibility of it falling on the edge or not, neither am I saying that it is not a possibility...

I'm just trying to explain why you're wrong when you say that "it doesn't effect the plausible outcome".

So, again, what you are saying is that it is not possible to alter the chance of a coin giving heads/tails? (Notice the question mark. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.)

[Autumn]

The logical explination of this is the fact that you are flipping the coin so even if you some how weighted either side of the coin to "help" improve apon your statistic the outcome is still the same a 49.9% chance. Angles, deflection, and leveling have nothing and everything to do with the pure luck of the draw. You flip it so by shear volume mass you have statiscly screwed yourself into giving yourself this percentage. Now if you rolled the coin then your percentages would change drastically if the coin was weighted to one side but this is not the case.

I've put in bold your spelling/grammar mistakes but not necessarily all. I've underlined the two sentences which make no sense to me. You make assertions that don't coherently follow what you've previously written, nor do the assertions you make seem justified in any way. It certainly doesn't help that your sentence structure is a mess.

You said my first point is a contradiction, so what is it? I can't see it. Furthermore, with such a claim I'll have to presume you're unfamiliar with the Law of large numbers.

Although here's a hint for you regarding what I said: 49.9/100% isn't really the percentage you want to be expressing.

You're telling me the probability of getting heads is 49.9%? My point still holds regardless of what arbitrary value you conjured up for the coin landing on its side. Your argument, in the loosest sense of the word, was completely tautological.

Once again you contradict your self, you give an A / B responce when the are 3 plausible outcomes. Like I said you can make a 100 different outcomes, which ever suits your needs.

What's my A/B response? Are the 3 plausible outcomes in your view heads, tails and landing on its side? How many times has a coin landed on its side for you when you've flipped it? In all statistics questions you've encountered (which I have to imagine can't be many) how many have presented the "side" option? Finally, do you know the mathematical meaning of the term "almost surely" that I've used to describe the probability of a coin landing on its side?

I haven't made 100 different outcomes. I've stated the answer and the intuition behind it. If you want to do some reading then the branch of statistics is Bayesian estimation.

[Che]

Anytime you flip a coin, there is a 50% chance of getting heads, and a 50% chance of getting tails. (It's either one or the other)

However.

After flipping the coin and it being heads (1 flip), if you flip it again you have a 50% chance of getting heads, and a 50% chance of getting tails(2nd flip).

1st Flip Heads
2nd Flip: Heads or Tails

Outcome 2/3 or 66% probability.


I wrote this for anyone who is not understand the concept. I didnt read all these posts because they are filled with people getting too personal and correcting grammar mistakes and other bullsh t.

[Meier Link]

I've put in bold your spelling/grammar mistakes but not necessarily all. I've underlined the two sentences which make no sense to me. You make assertions that don't coherently follow what you've previously written, nor do the assertions you make seem justified in any way. It certainly doesn't help that your sentence structure is a mess.

Oh thank you for pointing out my poor grammar: that really goes to prove your point. Then again your sentence structure is not the greatest either but I will not go through the trouble of bolding and underlining. Actually if you read what I wrote for what it is, it makes perfect sense. Maybe you just can’t comprehend the logic behind it???

The fact of the matter is that, even though I wrote that out in a drunken moment you have still yet to disprove my theory. Your response is full of ridicule of my typing. I must say I am amazed at your ability to debate.

You said my first point is a contradiction, so what is it? I can't see it. Furthermore, with such a claim I'll have to presume you're unfamiliar with the Law of large numbers.

And I quote

Yes, there is a chance that a coin will land on its side when flipped, but as I said before this probability is almost surely 0.

That is a contradiction. Should I go further in depth? Almost surely is a bull shit concept. Is that plain enough English for you: that is like calling something a near miss.

Although here's a hint for you regarding what I said: 49.9/100% isn't really the percentage you want to be expressing.

Actually I wouldn’t of said it if I didn’t mean it. The point I was arguing was the fact that you do not have a true 50/50 chance. And you have already agreed and then disagreed, please make up your mind this is becoming quite obtuse (wow I threw a big word out there too, go me)

You're telling me the probability of getting heads is 49.9%? My point still holds regardless of what arbitrary value you conjured up for the coin landing on its side. Your argument, in the loosest sense of the word, was completely tautological.

Honestly you missed the point of what I was trying to state, so I will put it into simpler terms for you. The odds of getting a 50/50 ratio on a 3 sided object are impossible. That is all I was getting at. Then the conversation turned to flipping verses rolling. With a flip the possible outcome is more limitless then the odds of rolling a coin.

When I was speaking that you did not define the OP enough is because it is the truth. You left multiple solutions open that can fit your theory but they can also disprove it. Yes I am familiar with the “laws of large numbers” but maybe you should become more familiar with the laws of gravity, plus you might also want to look into weight and balances on top of physics.

Maybe I should also remind you what you are trying to preach to is simply theory and in turn I will resort you to this. theory - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary Read the second line of the definition. You are basically stating your opinion is factual. Which it is not, your ideal for this thread is based on one theory and mine is just based on multiple.

Neither is proven right or wrong, so please don’t try to get so defensive. You are taking my debate as a direct attack on you and your believes (or so it seems.) I am just trying to get you to think out side of the proverbial box.

Next time you might want to actually respond in accordance to what some one is saying instead of responding to accusations and questions with questions, that doesn’t really help your cause.

[Treize]

Honestly you missed the point of what I was trying to state, so I will put it into simpler terms for you. The odds of getting a 50/50 ratio on a 3 sided object are impossible. That is all I was getting at. Then the conversation turned to flipping verses rolling. With a flip the possible outcome is more limitless then the odds of rolling a coin.

We aren't saying that it is impossible to have the coin land on its side. If we are dealing with a standard coin (which I am sure is meant) the outcomes would most likely round to Heads: 50.00%, Tails: 50.00%, Side: 0.00%. The probability of getting a standard coin to land on its side is so low, that it can basically be considered 0%. If you don't believe this, than try flipping a coin 1000 or more times and see if you get it to land on its side. I know that in my life, I have never seen a coin land on its side.

That is a contradiction. Should I go further in depth? Almost surely is a bull shit concept. Is that plain enough English for you: that is like calling something a near miss.

I do not see that as a contradiction. I'm not sure how "near miss" and "almost surely" relate. They are completely different.

Actually I wouldn’t of said it if I didn’t mean it. The point I was arguing was the fact that you do not have a true 50/50 chance. And you have already agreed and then disagreed, please make up your mind this is becoming quite obtuse (wow I threw a big word out there too, go me)

I don't get where you get this .1% chance that the coin will land on its side. From what I can tell, the probability is much lower and as I said would round to 0%.

I think that you are just being nitpicky right now because you didn't guess the answer that Autumn explained.

[Autumn]

Anytime you flip a coin, there is a 50% chance of getting heads, and a 50% chance of getting tails. (It's either one or the other)

However.

After flipping the coin and it being heads (1 flip), if you flip it again you have a 50% chance of getting heads, and a 50% chance of getting tails(2nd flip).

1st Flip Heads
2nd Flip: Heads or Tails

Outcome 2/3 or 66% probability.


I wrote this for anyone who is not understand the concept. I didnt read all these posts because they are filled with people getting too personal and correcting grammar mistakes and other bullsh t.

Maybe you should've read all the posts because I did explain the intuition and theory behind the answer in the first page of this thread. However, I'm not sure about the validity of your reasoning. It seems you're saying there are 3 possible outcomes and Heads makes up two of these potential outcomes. But that's not the set up of the problem: the first outcome is fixed so there's no randomness to it at the time of the second flip. The probability of the second flip being Heads or Tails is 1, which is not insightful. 2/3 is the expected probability of getting heads in the second flip, not getting 2 heads in 2 flips.

Furthermore, if you took the time to read the initial question more carefully, you'd have seen the problem is based on the premise that you do not know the true probability of getting Heads. Yes, it maybe 50% and can be, but you do not know this.

Also, Meier Link is simply unreasonable (pun intended). I know I'm right.

[Che]

Maybe you should post something that's ****ing worth reading then. Who gives a shit about flipping some mother ****ing coins over?

How about posting something like:
I present you with a hooker which you have no prior information on - for all you know it could be fair (probability of flipping her over and her having huge melons is 50%) or it might not be fair (e.g. probability of flipping her over and her having huge melons is 60%). I flip the dyke once and it comes out to be huge melons. If I flip the dyke again, with what probability would you expect her to have huge ****ing tits?

Maybe if you posted something that didn't bore the ever living **** out of me to the point where I have to concentrate so ****ing hard on a god damned answer you'd get better responses.

[Autumn]

Maybe if you posted something that didn't bore the ever living **** out of me to the point where I have to concentrate so ****ing hard on a god damned answer you'd get better responses.

You didn't read the question properly so the poor response was due to that, which it seems you admit. Therefore, it's a shame you need to "concentrate so ****ing hard" just to read.

[RagnaToad]

Maybe you should post something that's ****ing worth reading then. Who gives a shit about flipping some mother ****ing coins over?

How about posting something like:
I present you with a hooker which you have no prior information on - for all you know it could be fair (probability of flipping her over and her having huge melons is 50%) or it might not be fair (e.g. probability of flipping her over and her having huge melons is 60%). I flip the dyke once and it comes out to be huge melons. If I flip the dyke again, with what probability would you expect her to have huge ****ing tits?

Maybe if you posted something that didn't bore the ever living **** out of me to the point where I have to concentrate so ****ing hard on a god damned answer you'd get better responses.

???
If that's what you need to do in your mind, then do so. Don't bother other people with how boring this thread is. Apparently it's interesting in its boredom. At least it made you post...

[Che]

Lol. I wasn't serious when I posted that, but it killed the thread after I did so I just left it there.