• Trump Derangement Syndrome
    If your best summation of the difference between the Left and the Right is overly simplistic ambiguous colloquialisms then you are not being very practical.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome


    Yes, it is. When you judge what is "practical" you are judging that state based your personal standards.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome
    Remember that the Right was so upset with Obama's election that they tried to deny he was even an American. In fact Trump was a big part of that effort.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome
    Practicality is relative.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome
    It is just a ploy to distract people from real concerns. If nothing else Trump plays the 24 hour news cycle well and he rather people be talking about nonsense like this than the Helsinki summit or the children he had caged.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome
    Phase One: Push a phony condition

    Phase Two: Get people talking about it.

    Phase Three: Call legitimated concerns Trump derangement syndrome.

    Mass straw-man is deployed and hyperbolic stereotype is engaged.
  • Trump Derangement Syndrome
    It is not a real condition, so I am not sure why it should be treated as such.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    You didn't look at them all. If you had you would had noticed I raised the same objections. Then you would have noticed I simulated a data set based on the conditions of the problem. Also statistics definitely does empirical investigations via simulation.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    We don't have data in the OP; we have a theoretical problem only.JeffJo

    You keep demonstrating how few of my posts you have actually read.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    If a person is being honest and true with their words AND it turns out that they were incorrect does not make them deceitful, it just makes them wrong.ArguingWAristotleTiff

    Either Trump is a poorly informed moron or he is a liar, either way he fails. Personally, I think it is both.
  • What will Mueller discover?
    "...entitled to opinion"? That is an odd way to phrase it. Also Americans spell proselytizing with a Z.
  • What will Mueller discover?
    What you are doing is no different than religious proselytizing, and on some fourms that is considered ban worthy spam. You show little to no interest in any of the philosophical discourse. Your main interest seems to spread pro Trump spam.
  • What will Mueller discover?
    Probably just the talking points laid out by his employer.
  • What will Mueller discover?


    Русский Тролль говорит, что
  • What will Mueller discover?


    You talk about Trump A LOT. I checked your posting history.
  • What will Mueller discover?
    All you do is talk about Trump.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    I have said all I am going to say about this problem, as at this point the arguments are just recycling themselves. I am fully satisfied with my approach and my solution. It is time to move on.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    What you meant when you called it a "data science," is that it tries to apply the concepts of theoretical probability to real-world situations.JeffJo

    Data science, strangely enough, involves data. As a data scientist your job is to analyze the data, then it is the job of the subject matter experts to interpret how that applies to the real world. Statistics is a data science and in statistic we measure uncertainty, which is why some people call it the science of uncertainty.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    If you are not willing to read the thread, then I am not willing to read your post.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    It should probably all be reviewed and written up in proper notation, but it has been such a long thread I am not sure I want to spend the time to do that. I feel that my post number 6 sums it up concisely even if informally. Then with the simulations I did on page 26 I feel I have provided empirical proof of that statement. The next step is to formalize everything but since this is informal discourse that seems like unneeded effort to me.

    It might be time to consider making a new thread. I kind of feel that everything that needs to be said about this conundrum has been said.
  • Worthy! Most worthy is the Philosopher


    You scratch at the surface for superficial comprehension and try to peddle that as wisdom. Real comprehension takes real work and I just don't see the effort in you. So I am happy to facilitate snarky remarks, but I don't feel you are worth serious thought.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    R and S is the event you have X or 2X when you get A. By definition of A and B, if A=X then B =2X, or if A =2X then B=X. So by definition if A equals X then B cannot also equal X.

    We define A and B as: If A=Y=X then B=2X or if A=Y=2X then B=X, where Y is the amount you see opening envelope A and X is the unknown amount originally selected by the facilitator.

    My claim is then that the only possible outcomes for B is X or 2X.

    Proof:

    For all of Y, Y is a positive real number, such that Y=X or Y=2X, where X is some positive real number.

    You are handed A and you see Y inside.

    There are two cases here:

    Case One

    A=Y=X

    By definition of A and B if A=Y=X then B=2X therefore B=2X

    Case Two

    A=Y=2X

    By definition of A and B if A=Y=2X then B=X therefore B=X.

    Those are the only two possible cases for B therefore by the definition of a sample space the sample space for B is [X,2X]
    Jeremiah

    It gets messy I'll agree, as [R,S] is the same as [X,2X], but you have to remember they represent case one or case two. In case one B cannot equal X, by the definition of B and so on.

    We also suffer from sloppy notation, we probably should be using subscript.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six


    I pointed out a few times that the sample space of event R and the sample space of event S are equal subsets of each other, which means mathematically we can treat them the same. I also pointed out that as soon as you introduce Y they are no longer equal subsets and therefore mathematically cannot be treated the same.

    Here is an example. If Z=M and N=M then Z=N.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    I know this is a long thread, but tacking remarks on the end while only skimming though it, or skipping pages just leads to repeated content.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six


    I am not doing this, not until you actually read all of my posts in this thread.
  • Worthy! Most worthy is the Philosopher
    No one can say Science is goodInternetStranger

    Science is good. Looks like someone can say it. Should I test that again?
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    I changed the code a bit to come up with another visual demonstration. I changed the two.envelopes function to just output A and then copied it to another function called two.envelopes.s which outputs B.

    What this simulates is if you never switch then you walking away with A and if you always switch then you walk away with B. I used a normal distribution for this example but honestly you can do the same thing for any distribution since the content of A and B are determined by the same chance event.

    The point of this demonstration is to show that the possible distribution of A is the same as the possible distribution of B so I have included some graphs that can be visually compared, and I use a Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests, also known as the K-S test. This is a non-parametric test, and if you want the details on how it works just Google it, the concept is actually really simple.

    The K-S test compares two distributions to see if they match.

    The hypotheses works like this: Let F(x) and S(x) designate some unknown distribution functions of the X's and Y's respectively.

    Then our following two-sided null hypothesis is: F(x) = S(x) for all of x
    Then our alternative hypothesis is: F(x) does not equal S(x) for at least one value of x

    If you have never seen a classical statistical hypotheses test, the short and sweet of it, is if we get a low p-value we consider this evidence against the null hypothesis. The lower the p-value the greater the evidence. P-values range from 0 to 1. They are the probability of a ratio as extreme or more extreme than the observed given the null is true. Note they are not evidence for the null, failing to reject does not prove a null. The null is just that annoying guy that always demands you prove everything you say, but it is the alternative hypothesis that we are really testing for.


    Here is the code:

    two.envelopes <- function(){
    x <- (rnorm(1))
    x <- (abs(as.numeric(format(round(x, 3)))))*10 
    #randomly selects a number 
    #limits the number of decimal places x can have and muiltples x by 10 to simluate realistic dollar values. 
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(A))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g <- replicate(10000, two.envelopes())
    
    
    two.envelopes.s <- function(){
    x <- (rnorm(1))
    x <- (abs(as.numeric(format(round(x, 3)))))*10 
    #randomly selects a number 
    #limits the number of decimal places x can have and muiltples x by 10 to simluate realistic dollar values. 
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(B))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g.s <- replicate(10000, two.envelopes())
    
    library(ggplot2)
    plot(g)
    plot(g.s)
    ggplot() + aes(g)+ geom_histogram(binwidth=10, colour="black", fill="white")
    
    ggplot() + aes(g.s)+ geom_histogram(binwidth=10, colour="black", fill="white")
    
    ks.test(g, g.s)
    
    #K-S test results
    
    p-value will be approximate in the presence of ties
    	Two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test
    
    data:  g and g.s
    D = 0.0077, p-value = 0.9283
    alternative hypothesis: two-sided
    
    

    So we see with a D test statistics of 0.0077 and a 0.92 p-value we don't have strong enough evidence to support the alternative hypothesis that the two distributions are reasonably different.

    Of course this was an expected outcome and would remain true no matter how X was selected, as once X is selected its distribution in the envelopes is now something separate which depends on how the envelopes themselves are selected.

    If you don't like the K-S test here are some plots that allow you to view the similarities:

    There are scatter plots of each distribution and histograms of each. They will look very similar.

    Scatter Plots:

    https://ibb.co/ksr0P8

    https://ibb.co/bW6gxT

    Histograms:

    https://ibb.co/c9w3Bo

    https://ibb.co/h30248
  • What will Mueller discover?


    Are you a Russian cyber troll?
  • What will Mueller discover?
    Not actually technically possible due the their density.raza

    They were hacked.
  • What will Mueller discover?
    The indictment by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, whose task it is to investigate possible collusion between the Trump campaign and ‘Russians’,raza

    That is not correct. Mueller is tasked with investigating the Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 elections. This includes investigating the extent to which the Trump campaign was involved and any other related possible crime.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    I have been messing with this in R, and wrote a function which simulates the game. Note that is not a simple repeated sample from a predefined sample space. It simulates the game, by selecting X randomly then randomly places X or 2X into A. Then X or 2X into B based on what is in A. It then returns the value of both A and B.

    The function, which is called two.envelopes, is one go at the game, and then the function replicate can be used to run it several times in a row. Which I did then output those to a matrix.

    I ran the game simulation under 4 different conditions: Where X is chosen from a normal distribution, where X is chosen from a uniform distribution, where is X is chosen from a Cauchy distribution and where X is sampled from an interval scale. The function could be used as well to do actual statistical analyses either Classical or Bayesian, by generating enough simulated data to support such an approach.

    I know these efforts will be lost on some people, but it does provide a visual summary which demonstrates the distribution in which X was selected from is not significant when assessing the possible outcome of envelope A and B concerning X or 2X.

    Also, this gives results that can be reviewed which are not dependent on defining a sample space or on calculating an expected value.

    Normal Distribution:

    two.envelopes <- function(){
    x <- (rnorm(1))
    x <- (abs(as.numeric(format(round(x, 3)))))*10 
    #randomly selects a number 
    #limits the number of decimal places x can have and muiltples x by 10 to simluate realistic dollar values. 
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(A,B))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g <- t(replicate(100, two.envelopes()))
    head(g)
    
    #results
    
          [,1]  [,2]
    [1,]  5.23 10.46
    [2,]  5.48 10.96
    [3,] 25.60 12.80
    [4,]  6.17 12.34
    [5,]  3.88  7.76
    [6,]  7.59 15.18
    



    Uniform distribution:

    two.envelopes <- function(){
    x <- (runif(1))
    x <- (abs(as.numeric(format(round(x, 3)))))*10 
    #randomly selects a number 
    #limits the number of decimal places x can have and muiltples x by 10 to simluate realistic dollar values.
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(A,B))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g <- t(replicate(100, two.envelopes()))
    head(g)
    
    #results
    
          [,1]  [,2]
    [1,] 27.20 13.60
    [2,] 28.72 14.36
    [3,] 12.49 24.98
    [4,] 12.95 25.90
    [5,] 61.18 30.59
    [6,]  2.66  1.33
    
    

    Cauchy distribution:

    two.envelopes<- function(){
    x <- (rcauchy(1, location = 0, scale = 1))
    x <- (abs(as.numeric(format(round(x, 3)))))*10 
    #randomly selects a number 
    #limits the number of decimal places x can have and muiltples x by 10 to simluate realistic dollar values. 
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(A,B))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g <- t(replicate(100, two.envelopes()))
    head(g)
    
         [,1]  [,2]
    [1,] 10.22 20.44
    [2,] 24.54 12.27
    [3,]  2.05  4.10
    [4,]  8.96  4.48
    [5,] 15.44  7.72
    [6,] 13.74 27.48
    
    

    Interval Scale:

    two.envelopes <- function(){
    x <- (sample(1:100, 1))
    #randomly selects a number 
    p <- c(x,2*x)
    A <- sample(p, 1, replace=F)
    #creates a vector with x and 2x then randomly selects one for A.
    if (A == x) {
    B <- 2*x
    } else {
    (B <- x)
    }
    return(c(A,B))
    }
    #sets the value for B based on: if A = x then B = 2x or if A = 2x then B = x
    g <- t(replicate(100, two.envelopes()))
    head(g)
    
    #results
    
         [,1] [,2]
    [1,]   27   54
    [2,]  136   68
    [3,]   33   66
    [4,]   14   28
    [5,]   30   60
    [6,]   57  114
    

    The thing to notice here is that in all cases the absolute value of the difference between column one and column two is always equal to the lesser of the two (save rounding errors). The lesser of the two is X.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    The difference between the two envelopes will always be X and you don't need to be God to understand that very simple concept.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    From the God's-eye (ie omniscient) point of view, which is perspective 1 from the quoted post, there is no c, because there is no non-trivial probability distribution of X. X is a fixed quantity, known only to God and to the game show host.andrewk
    And algebra.
  • Worthy! Most worthy is the Philosopher
    Then what you are saying is that I am more of a philosopher than you are.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    There is a reason we need to consider X as an unknown and approach it as such, with algebra. To do otherwise means making a bunch of baseless assumptions.

    I know algebra is not the most glamorous math, it, however, is very robust, which makes it the more appropriate tool when dealing with these unknowns.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    Furthermore, it makes no sense to use a probability density curve on this problem, considering X would only be selected ONCE, which means X<2X ALWAYS (given that X is positive and not 0). That means no matter what X is the expected value will always be 1/2X+X, in every single case.

    If you try to fit X to a statistical distribution you are just piling assumptions on top of assumptions. You are making assumptions about the sampling distribution and the variance. Assumptions in which you do not have the data to justify. You are also making assumptions about how X was even selected. Assumption on top of assumption on top of assumption. . . .

    Ya, great math there.
  • Mathematical Conundrum or Not? Number Six
    ou can't just enumerate a set of cases, and claim each is equally likely. If you could, there would be a 50% chance of winning, or losing, the lottery.JeffJo

    That is a very bad understanding of what a sample space and an event is. You are not applying your Principle of Indifference there, which states from your link: "The principle of indifference states that if the n possibilities are indistinguishable except for their names, then each possibility should be assigned a probability equal to 1/n." n in this case would be the total possible combinations of the lottery numbers.
  • Worthy! Most worthy is the Philosopher
    Some people want the glory of being called philosopher but they don't want to put in the hard work to get there.
  • Worthy! Most worthy is the Philosopher


    If STEM is philosophy then why do you not pursue it?

    When you get right down to it, there is no way any legitimate philosopher can bypass math and/or science. Personally, I am not a philosopher, my area is mathematical science, but I respect a philosopher who is disciplined in their studies, while I consider others lazy wannabes.