Master_Q GROUP: Members POSTS: 1113 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 1:25 pm
Probability To: Q1 and everyone that want to read it
You have posted a few more topics on this so besides going and scrolling through the ENT board Im going to post what I think here.
Ok first off the definition of probability: (from Webster) Seeming true or real or have a good chance of happening Here’s a better one : Theory of probability, branch of mathematics that deals with measuring or determining quantitatively the likelihood that an event or experiment will have a particular outcome. Probability is based on the study of permutations and combinations and is the necessary foundation for statistics.
All its says and what probability says is what is the likelihood of an event or what is the ratio of an event occurring vs. the others (p:q) this gives you probability.
Probability is determined by: # of trials Combinations
Why combinations? You are only looking at the flip of a coin there is more then it to that. What about dice? Adding two of them together so I land on 1 and on the other die a 1 so I got 2 combinations is a factor because landing on 2 you can only have a 1 & a 1, but with other #s multiple combinations arise. When you put both of them (the dice) in you have a 36 combination possibility. 7 is the most likely hit # because more #s add up to it. If you look at the chances for every possibility 2 through 12 there are better odds for the middle #s and less odds of getting the other #s. Graph Here is a simple graph depicting the likely hood of rolling with the dice. (Estimated) I’m not sure if it will turn out, hopefully it will.                                         2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Combinations are a factor it might not be with one kind of experiment, but with another like the dice it is as shown in the graph.
I hope that answered all of the reaming questions, but if you have any more or like to expostulate more your ideas please do so. Of if anyone else has something to say or more info don’t hesitate. I also recommend that you look at parallel universes because that does connect to probability.
Master Q StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Master_Q GROUP: Members POSTS: 1113 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 1:33 pm
Did not work! Oh well, why did it push all of the data in?
Well it should of have had a larger bar in 7 The shorterst bars in 2 & 12 The others just went up and up a bit to get to 7 and then went down after 7.
Here is one more try to get a graph! 2 ______ 3 _________ 4 _____________ 5 _________________ 6 ____________________ 7 ________________________ 8 ____________________ 9 _________________ 10 _____________ 11 _________ 12 ______
or this one (more likely to work 2 XXXX 3 XXXXXXX 4 XXXXXXXXX 5 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 6 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 7 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 8 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 9 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 10 XXXXXXXXXX 11 XXXXXXX 12 XXXX
First time I tried to but HTML code in it!
Hopefully now it looks right!
Master Q StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

brianbrane GROUP: Members POSTS: 302 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 1:37 pm
Master Q
Probability is really very interesting especially when it is considered in Quantum Mechanics...paths of particles etc.
It is apparently likely that a particle will/can travel all possible paths between two points!! which is weird isn’t ?
However the likelyhood is that it will travel in a straight line...mmmm...very interesting....

kirkintha GROUP: Members POSTS: 247 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 5:35 pm
Taking a look a probability on a grand scale, makes these simple concepts a little underrrated. True determination of probability is very hard. Think about it this way, meteorologists still cannot predict the weather. Tornadoes can form with little notice to those in its path. Tropical storms can become hurricanes, but not evertime. There is alway a percent (%) chance of rain. Meteorology deals witht the probability that events will happen. Physicists are really the weathermen of the subatomic realm.

thejackal GROUP: Members POSTS: 30 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 6:34 pm
Sorry but why did we want to know that??

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 7:21 pm
"Here’s a better one : Theory of probability, branch of mathematics that deals with measuring or determining quantitatively the likelihood that an event or experiment will have a particular outcome. Probability is based on the study of permutations and combinations and is the necessary foundation for statistics."
Yes, but there really isn’t chance in nature. The only thing with a resemblance to it is, for a lack of a better term, is difficulty, which can be absolutely measured by what amount it takes to overcome it, like a balance.
We have to understand what likelihood and chance mean, because they really are separate terms eventhough they’re often expressed to mean the same thing, if we are to understand if probability can be proved or disproven. Likelihood means, and this isn’t exact, a certain weight or pull in outcome that determines exactly by number of trials how often an event *will*, not *might*, occur. Do we agree on this definition of likelihood? Chance means occurrence of events whose frequency is undeterminable, and not because of lack of knowledge but because they are undeterminable. Chance by nature, by it’s definition that’s given in storybooks, is arbitrary. It is without likelihood.
Alright, now considering these definitions, probability is disproven in two ways. The first one is we know that chance doesn’t exist, by the fact that everything has a cause and so is determinable; and so we know probability is false because what it is said to be measuring doesn’t exist.
The second one is, we know that chance doesn’t have a likelihood because it is arbitrary and so since probability is the measurement of the likelihood of chance we know that it is false because chance doesn’t have likelihood.
We also have to remember that chance is supposed to be a natural feature and not a mathematical idea. It is supposed as a physical fact.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 8:40 pm
I said the defination of likelihood was: "Likelihood means, and this isn’t exact, a certain weight or pull in outcome that determines exactly by number of trials how often an event *will*, not *might*, occur."
But I misplaced the term number of trials for number of possible combinations. I meant to say number of possible combinations.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 8:44 pm
"Yes, but there really isn’t chance in nature. The only thing with a resemblance to it is, for a lack of a better term, is difficulty, which can be absolutely measured by what amount it takes to overcome it, like a balance."
This is actually another way of saying, cause and effect.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:02 pm
In probability, chance, likelihood, and probability all have the same meaning.

Master_Q GROUP: Members POSTS: 1113 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:14 pm
First of all probability and chance are really in many ways simonies. But I not going to go into the English’s language arts examination of it.
Is there chance in nature? Yes. The quantum theory says that there is chance in everything. "God does not play dice with the world", that statement is fully understandable but to the atomic level it is true. In nature there for it does exist. The uncertainty principle for example is about chance. Is that partial here or there it is only by chance or probability that it is in that spot. The subatomic world is ruled by probability/chance.
Not "everything has a cause and so is determinable" because probability would not even exist if that statement was true. Can you calculate when you tell or create a program (on the computer) to run a randomize timer the result? No of course not do you know where the dice or die are/is going to land. Again no. Cause has effect; true, but thats linearly thinking.
Connection to math: The root came from 17th Century French mathematician Blaise Pascals friend who was a gambler and asked him why a particular roll of the die happens so often and also how to split the pot of an interrupted dice game. They wrote letters back & forth that developed the mathematical branch know as probability. Math has a connection its just abut the possible results weighted accordingly.
I know I said this before (you don’t have to read it this): Someone could just say part over whole, but that really does not give good depth. Probability is about outcome so the possibility of an outcome that will happen is P. The probability saying that the outcome will not occur is q = 1  p. So the probability that the outcome will occur lets give a ratio p:q and the probability against that is q:p. **2+ outcomes What I said works fine, but what if we have two or more common outcomes. For example those two outcomes would be X and Y are p and P, so the odds favoring X and not favoring Y would be p to P. Or what about when an event must turnout to be common exclusive outcomes O1 , (O1, O2, . . . technically here it would be assigned On and n would be superscripted.) when looking at that the different probabilities would be p1 , . . . And for the # values that support the outcomes would be v1 , . . . So put it all together E=p1+v1+p2+v2+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . I hope that you kind of got my point on this issue, it is confusing for me when I have to write math to words that’s the most difficult part for me.
Look at geometric probability: (some new info here) that I think answers a lot. I think that helps explain some of the foundation of the mathematics in it. Example: On DS9 there playing darts. The board is a square one side’s length is = to 30. Then there is a big circle in that square it radius (big circle) is = to 9. (9 includes the small circle!!!) Then there is one last circle thats in the middle of that big circle it radius is = to 1. What is the geometric probability of hitting that small circle? 21%
~ The main point that you are saying is that it does not exist in nature, but it does just apply quantum mechanics, statistics, game theory, combinatorics, Permutations and combinations, and there are a ton of others.
So unless you can disprove the quantum theory or something or the game theory probability stands correct and it is I just think that you are misunderstanding it as you said in one of your other posts. Hopefully I got my point across this time.
Master Q StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:15 pm
This isn’t right: "Likelihood means, and this isn’t exact, a certain weight or pull in outcome that determines exactly by number of possible combinations how often an event *will*, not *might*, occur."
Something has to be changed in it. I should have said ...that determines exactly by number of possible combinations how often a likely event will occur.
Now we have to define likely. Likely means an unnecessacitated event with multiple possible states.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:28 pm
No no no...
"Likely means an unnecessacitated event with multiple possible states."
Not that. It means a possible unnecessacitated event with multiple possible states.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:32 pm
"The subatomic world is ruled by probability/chance."
They only say that because they can’t percieve or don’t understand the causes of subatomic events due to their, experimentors, own limitation in undetstandin or knowledge, not because likelihood is a actual factor in nature.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:35 pm
"Not "everything has a cause and so is determinable" because probability would not even exist if that statement was true. Can you calculate when you tell or create a program (on the computer) to run a randomize timer the result? No of course not do you know where the dice or die are/is going to land. Again no. Cause has effect; true, but thats linearly thinking."
It doesn’t exist because chance doesn’t exist. We know everything has a cause so nothing is likely, it is absolute. Probability in light of this evidence is just a misconception. It doesn’t exist. A misconception exists under the name probability.

Q1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 4335 
Report this
Jul. 22 2002, 9:38 pm
If they knew subatomic events were ruled by likelihood and not by cause and effect they could prove it was so but they say they don’t know how they come about, so that means they don’t if they are ruled by likelihood, because if they did they would know that they came about due to likelihood but they’re saying they don’t know how.
