ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

you didn’t answer my question

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 16 2002, 8:24 pm

"See one thing that you have to understand that there is sometimes that it is not possible or convenient to find the theoretical probability of an event so you have to perform an experiment, do a survey, and look at the history of a event. That is still probability."

In what sense? How is it still probability? You also didn’t answer my question which was what is subbed?

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 16 2002, 8:36 pm

I have completely answered the question there should be no doubt to that unless you just don’t understand the math to it which is probably the problem because I have really answered all of those questions its just that you have to connect the dots.

Original post:
I dont have to really give a proof for this because its just simple algebra 101, but I will give you one that shows one thing can be subbed from another and that applies to everything also I will give you a proof that shows a connection to the issues.

Subbing one thing for another is just throwing in variables and defining them.
Like
3x^3+14=2x^3+15
x^3+14=15
x^3=1
x=1^(1/3)
y=ax^3+bx^2+cx+d
y=a(1^(1/3))^3+b(1^(1/3))^2+c(1^(1/3))+d
thats math 101 you just wont make the connection or connect the dots I cannot for you

Statistics is basically something like a graph that shows you the outcomes of something like maybe the possible outcomes of a event.

See one thing that you have to understand that there is sometimes that it is not possible or convenient to find the theoretical probability of an event so you have to perform an experiment, do a survey, and look at the history of a event. That is still probability .

Lets say that there are 8! different permutations of the 8 events and in these there is only 1 in the order in which it is listed on a paper so P(8 in order) = 1/8! = 1/40320 = 0.0000248. The statistical part is 8! but goes into probability it is subbed just like anything in math.

"KISS" Keep it simple ...
See you do look at statistics to determine probability lets say look at the different Internet users. (Source: GVU’s WWW User Surveys)
Under 21 = 1636
21-40 = 6617
45-60 = 3693
616-80 = 491
Over 80 = 6
Statistics you are reading above - sub that to probability (its for some areas of quantum mechanics the same) So lets say we have randomly selected Internet users what is the chance that they are such in such years old. That is applying statistics in any probability problem it uses this.
-----
Probability has to look at all possible results just by looking at the result and weighing them is applying statistics. I can make a graph of the WWW example and look at that which is statistics because it did a interview of some people that are actually on the internet and found out there age that is statistics. We can figure out the chance someone on the internet is of a certain age group using the statistics we have and sub it and apply it to probability. But in every case we are using statistics because just listing the possible results is defining the structure of statistics.
{If you want a more direct example using the WWW then I can give you one if you like}

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 17 2002, 9:22 am

You’re just saying things can be subbed but you’re not saying what is being subbed in the case of probability in science. That’s my question and you haven’t answered it. And just to remind you, yes you do have to prove what you’re saying if that’s the purpose of the discussion. And in fact you’re saying you’ve proven it and then say I don’t have to prove it. This is absurd.

"I have completely answered the question there should be no doubt to that..."

"I dont have to really give a proof for this because..."

Do you remember my question?

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 17 2002, 2:23 pm

Believe it or not I did answer your question unless you did not read what I said completely. I did say that I dont really have to prove it because it just a math rule, but I did if you really read what I said. I dont see how you could not understand what I have stated.

Statistics can be subbed into probability and it really always does that is what I said.
Really in probability you are always doing this because you have to determine what might happen that is statistics in it self and then give it a ratio that goes to probability.

"Statistics you are reading above - sub that to probability"

"Probability has to look at all possible results just by looking at the result and weighing them is applying statistics"

"I can make a graph of the WWW example and look at that which is statistics because it did a interview of some people that are actually on the internet and found out there age that is statistics."

"We can figure out the chance someone on the internet is of a certain age group using the statistics"


The WWW example:
(Source: GVU’s WWW User Surverys - 1998)
Statistics:
Internet Users
Under 21: ______1636
21-40:______________________________6617
41-60_______________3693
61-80:__491
Over 80: _6
Probability :
What is the chance that someone you talk to on the internet is at most 20?
P(user is at most 20) = 1636/12443 = 0.131 = 13.1%

What is the probability that someone you talk to on the internet is at least 41 years old?
P(user is at least 41) = 4190/12443 = 0.337 = 33.7%

The before info is really always statistics then sub that to probability to give you a % or ratio of the chance of "x".

If you are giving a ratio of the chance of something happening then it looks at statistics first then it applies that information taken from statistics and then puts into probability.

If you apply that and connect the dots its the same with quantum mechanics because its basically the same math more complex yes, but it all goes back to the basics as everything else does and everything must go by the basic rules or it would not be correct. Also just because there is no "scientific label" does not mean that this does not apply to it because like I said math connects to them all and applies the same this is just the result of the rules of math and its true logic.

Master Q
StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 17 2002, 2:52 pm

Also about when I say connect the dots I can show you them but in really life for the understanding of it I can not do that for you because you must be willing to do this. For example I can say got to graph a parabola

I first would give you basic info then give you more direct steps for example: (more of a abstract example)
Y=ax^2+bx+c
It will go up if a>0 and down if a<0
It is wider than a graph of y=a^2 if |a| 1
The x-coordinate of the vertex is b/(2a)
The axis symmetry is the vertical line x = -b/(2a)
1. Find the x-coordinate vertex
2. Sub x of vertex into y solve y
3. Plus & minus vertex of x sub for x solve for y
4. Graph
This is how to do this and I have explained that the data you have to sub into the probability is statistics. I have also shown you an example of how I look at the statistics and then sub that into probability. You might say that I have not gave a direct example on science, but math works the same way for everything just with different variables that is just how math works. I can take a small idea of probability and example and it will work basically the same way for something complex just more variables. {Also we could use what we know of the graph that I have shown and apply that also because the stats could be on that but it sill if it is just probabilty uses the stats}
more of a direct example
If you have a compound event for example then if a and b are two events then the probability of a or b is P(a or b) = P(a) + P(b) P(a and b) or if they are mutually exclusive then it would be P(a or b) = P(a) + P(b). See if we just look at this simple math the statistics is the reasoning of how much weight a or b has.

I hope that you understand a bit more and please don’t say that I am not giving you the answers to your questions because I am its just either you dont understand what I am saying or not really taking a few minutes to read what I am saying completely.

Master Q
StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 17 2002, 6:09 pm

You’ve finally given some sort of a description. I say some sort of description because you didn’t fully explain it works, but that’s good enough.

So let’s look at this description. Just hypotheticaly you say there’s a certain percentage chance that any person you talk to on the internet fits a probability of haveing a certain description. One way to disprove this is just by experiment. That is a count of the type of people on the internet and of course if you counted everyone again it would be the same, but naturally you won’t get results in that ratio if you count any given number cases less than the total. And the reason is, going beyond experiment, they are not presented in any order that represetns the statistical data and because their description or qualities are already given, if you know them or not. They’re not likely to be something, they are something.

This is where the ideas behind probability fall apart when faced with the principles of science. Probability is not scientific or at all functional.

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 17 2002, 6:19 pm

The reason is groups can be represent in a order that doesn’t represent any probability ratio put on statistical information. For instance, let’s say that 20% of internet users are between 30-38 years old. Now if you picked out any group in the ratio of 1/5, just as long as it’s not everybody, it’s possible to get any combination of the total age groups represented. So it doesn’t work.

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 18 2002, 1:19 am

Not giving proofs when that’s what’s being asked for is just against the purpose here. Because you’re not proving your points doesn’t mean that you don’t know how, so I’ll just say that if you’re not willing to prove anything you say then this is meaningless, and time isn’t something to be wasted.

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 18 2002, 7:40 pm

I have given proofs - statistics can be subbed into probability and it always is just sub that example into a proof.

S for statistics

P(S) = probability

This is a proof.

Also just by doing an experiment asking people at random what age they fit (through the internet) would prove probability. If you read what I said this was done on the internet through some ISP providers. Of course this proves probability because its like saying that if I win the lottery it disproves probability this is not the case. Your logic is not correct in this because you are saying that 32 this is not the case. What has a greater chance of happing you winning the lottery or losing it? Its about the bigger piece of the pie.

Also I have been saying this every since we have been talking about it its just because you are not thinking out side the box.

I’m sorry there is no way that you can prove what you are saying because you don’t give a proof just a conjuncture and what I have said disproves what you are saying anyways. Lets say that you go to a Mexican neighborhood when you look around you mainly see Mexicans because there is a larger # of them as a result you are more probably of seeing one of them. This is simple math which # is bigger you cannot disprove that in any way.

Master Q
StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 18 2002, 8:14 pm

I don’t believe you know what a proof is. That’s alright though.

I’ll just ask you the same question that I asked a while back. How is a outcome of a event determined by a probability ratio? That’s a direct and simple question and it requires nothing more than a direct and simple answer.

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 18 2002, 8:45 pm

I know what a proof is I have been made several of them, but when I tried to give a really good one that really puts this is rest you did not understand it because you do not know Boolean algebra. You just cannot connect the dots or think out of the box because if I gave you one I personally don’t think you would understand and the one I have gave from my previous post is a proof really if you understood it’s a mathematical concept.
Why don’t you give a real proof? A one that is a two column proof with statements and reasons using real variables and not just "in the case of this happening" (you cannot really give something like that in a proof)

For your question I have answered that several times and I think you know the answer to that question. Its just a ratio - define a ratio or define what a % is - when you do that there can be only one answer to that question that’s why I don’t know why you would question me on something so simplistic. Its just the possible happenings of the certain event x over all of the possibilities and apply that to a ratio. So P(X)= (# of outcomes of x)/(total # of outcomes)

Also I have answered your question when I was talking about compound events you should of just applied that as a result sometimes I don’t think you fully read what I say.
If A and B are 2 events, then the probability of A or B is:
P(A or B)=P(A)+P(B)-P(A and B)
If A and B are mutually exclusive then
P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B)
If they are independent events then
P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B)
If they are dependent events then
P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B | A)
If it is a binomial experiment of n trials then the exactly k succession would be
P(k successes) = nCkP^k(1-P)^(n-k)
Also the distribution of this (n) would be if np>=5 and n(1-p)>=5 then x = np and the standard deviation of is o = (np(1-p))^(1/2)

The probability saying that the outcome will not occur is q = 1 - p. (stay with me don’t get lost). So the probability that the outcome will occur lets give a ratio p:q and the probability against that is q:p. For two outcomes it 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+ . . . . . . . . .

Wow finally done. Sorry it took me so long I had to get the old paper out and figure it out all over again

Master Q
StarTrek_MasterQ@yahoo.com

Master_Q

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1113

Report this Aug. 18 2002, 9:07 pm

Sorry about my silly mistakes in there (grammar / sentence structure), but all the math looks right after I just reviewed it.

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 19 2002, 10:32 am

"I know what a proof is I have been made several of them, but when I tried to give a really good one that really puts this is rest you did not understand it because you do not know Boolean algebra."

You think saying something is true is the same as proving that it is true. Then why would need proof, and why would that be separate thing, if all we needed to show something was true was just to say it was true?? You don’t know what a proof is, it’s clear. A discussion of proofs requires that people already know what that concept is. In a discussion of proof I’m not there to have a discussion of proofs not to tell people what proof is.

"You just cannot connect the dots or think out of the box because..."

That’s not the point, if you still haven’t understood. The point is if you’re going to prove something you have to offer a proof, and that’s what I’m looking for. If you’re not going to offer a proof then this is not the kind of discussion you want to be in.

"I don’t know why you would question me on something so simplistic..."

Truly simplistic.. :) It’s simple but not that simple. It seems like proof has been forgotten in modern science or whatever they want to call themselves.

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 19 2002, 10:40 am

"In a discussion of proof I’m not there to have a discussion of proofs not to tell people what proof is."

In a discussion of proof I’m there to have a disucssion of proofs not to tell people what proof is. Thank you.

Q1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4335

Report this Aug. 19 2002, 11:31 am

And you didn’t even my question.

"I’ll just ask you the same question that I asked a while back. How is a outcome of a event determined by a probability ratio? That’s a direct and simple question and it requires nothing more than a direct and simple answer."

Your answer was not how it was determined by you again tried to say, not show, that it is determined. My question was how does a physical event conform to a probability ratio and you answered physical events are determined by probability ratios. Go figure.. Does it seem like people are going crazy?

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum