No it doesn't. And it's illogical to use event 1 to assess the likelihood of event 2, and vice versa. Sampling and population, for one thing? You should create event 2 comparable to event 1 by changing the variables, not the nature of the measurement or the intent.Q2) Does logic and mathematics undoubtedly indicate us that likelihood of Event 1 is higher than likelihood of Event 2? — Geerts
Yes, it is illogical. See above.Q3) Is it logical to assess likelihood of Event 1 lower than likelihood of Event 2? Can P(Event 1) < P(Event 2) — Geerts
Can 0% (literally impossible) thus Person A's prediction about himself be the correct likelihood outcome of Event 1? — Geerts
For me almost anything that can occur in this world would have much higher probability than Event 2 which is absurdly improbable. — Geerts
Perhaps the lack of response is due to lack of expertise (or talent) in Statistics & Probability. Objective science is based on factual observations. But statistical Probability is a subjective belief (inference ; prediction) about unobserved or not-yet real events & things (possibilities) --- based on the inexact (proportional) mathematics of implicit order within randomness. That's why Bayesian Inference uses the term "belief", rather than "fact", to describe our projections into the future --- which will only later be "proved" to be true & factual, or not.Seems that my post didn't draw any attention :chin: Any response that helps to answer my questions will be more than appreciated. — Geerts
"If the boat is 231 feet long, weighs 3 tonnes, then how old is the captain?" — god must be atheist
There is no paradox. 1 is synthetic. 2 is analytic. — Hanover
I'm sure there's someone out there who qualifies as a saint or a bodhisattva, but so long as him/her robbing a bank doesn't violate the laws of nature, there's nothing impossible about that i.e. the probability of a heist isn't 0%. — Agent Smith
No. All sorts of things could happen. He could suddenly have a stroke which causes changes in his mental state leading to him robbing the bank. Or he could get a phone call saying that his children are being held hostage until he robs the bank. Really unlikely, but certainly greater than the cat picture. — T Clark
Keeping in mind that the screen showing the cat has the same probability as any other pattern of pixels — T Clark
In other words, your knowledge has a likelihood of 100% that this will happen.
This is a rather complex proposition, so being 100% right by all chances is very high.
You just converted me from atheist to believer.
YOU ARE THE ALMIGHTY! — god must be atheist
Hello, I'm using this message to communicate with the administrators. Yesterday I made quotations and submitted two replies but they weren't published. I see that now I'm receving replies to my post. I will now make a clarification in reply to the user 'God must be atheist' If you publish it it will be appreciated. Thank you. — Geerts
"If the boat is 231 feet long, weighs 3 tonnes, then how old is the captain?" — god must be atheist
Q1) Zero percent probability never truly exists, because the statistic is based on imperfect information from the past. We could always discover new outcomes in the future, which would change our set of statistics. — Bird-Up
Your elaboration is appreciated. I think you're just making a generalization by saying zero percent probability never truly exists. Can you explain please? — Geerts
To put it another way: humans will never have the ability to see 0% probability in the universe. We would need absolute knowledge of everything in order to ensure that something is truly impossible. So what would be the reason that we should debate the existence of things that we know we can never see? It would be a useless breed of speculation. — Bird-Up
Going back to the example of the random pixel generator, we already know that outcome of an image is not possible. The pseudo-random numbers follow a certain pattern of distribution and a period. All the patterns will (mathematically) never have the opportunity to line up. So the image in a random pixel generator would be an example of absolute 0% probability. But again, this is an abstract idea where we control all the variables; so I don't consider it to be true example of probability (just a description of the functionality instead). — Bird-Up
I assume then you have no problem with accepting theoretically literal 0% probability — Geerts
How do you approach then having 7 in a 6 sided dice which is mathematically considered as 0% — Geerts
What about then paradoxes and clear illogical assumptions? Does your standpoint transcend boundaries of the logic? — Geerts
Indeed random pixel generator is another version of perhaps more popular Borges' Library of Babel or infinite monkey theorem examples which may be simpler to explain. — Geerts
People Are Really Bad At Probability :
https://www.fastcompany.com/3061263/people-are-really-bad-at-probability-and-this-study-shows-how-easy-it-is-to-trick-us — Gnomon
Most interesting. — Ms. Marple
Probably, no one was keeping written records of their prophecies. Yet, people tend to remember the "hits" and forget the "misses" (confirmation bias). Selective memory, and poor probability calculations, allowed the seers to survive false prophecies . . . unless the king was especially p*ssed, and ordered "off with his head".I was led to believe that kings/emperorors/shahs/khans/pharoahs/sultans based their campaigns on auguries carried out by priests, hoping for good/bad omens to give them some idea on the probability of success in their ventures. What was the success rate of such ventures? — Agent Smith
We end up with an unfathomably low probability. — Geerts
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.