They're equally likely, unless you add extra specific conditions. And?
Also, why on earth would you appeal to "natural human inclination" for probability estimates when that has proven time and again terribly inaccurate?
Correct, they are statistically identical, but in your day to day life, if one guy kept winning the lottery, it would (hopefully) get your noggin joggin’, because you (hopefully) understand how pattern recognition, the lottery, and humans all work, to a limited extent. It would be a clear hallmark of design, a plan behind the pattern.
"definable but very largely improbable"
Not currently the case for even the smartest minds, or a mathematically rigorous rejection of the fine-tuned universe argument would be readily available for you or anyone else to find and share (there isn’t one)
The chances of life emerging randomly is squarely in that last category.
This is an assertion. I’ve proven with math that in fact, the possibility is so vanishingly small as to be, for all intents and purposes, impossible. Have you followed the link and actually read the OP of this post? This is just a cross-post, unfortunately stripped of all the detail present in the original version. Which is why I recommended from the start that people post there.
Correct, they are statistically identical, but in your day to day life, if one guy kept winning the lottery, it would (hopefully) get your noggin joggin’, because you (hopefully) understand how pattern recognition, the lottery, and humans all work, to a limited extent. It would be a clear hallmark of design, a plan behind the pattern.
And here a direct example of where human intuition is typically terrible at judging probabilities. Why should my noggin be joggin more about one equally probable outcome than the other?
"definable but very largely improbable"
Not currently the case for even the smartest minds
Definable is not defined. I suspect you can't provide me with exactly how many people live in the USA right this second. It is definable, but not currently defined, but it would be absurd to claim that is proof that there are infinite people.
I’ve proven with math that in fact, the possibility is so vanishingly small as to be, for all intents and purposes, impossible.
No you haven't proven anything, you've made an incorrect statement that large==infinite, and insisted on sticking with it even when it's pointed out. The patience required to teach you the proper process of mathematical proof in the face of that obstinacy would not be infinite, but it is very large. And I'm afraid I just don't have it in me to put up with these deluded claims all day.
Haha, either you're very confused about limit theory or you are for the third time now trying to say that a very small probability is a limit approaching infinity without any understanding that those are fundamentally different terms.
That's like saying a number must be irrational because you got bored of counting after 10 decimal places.
And the fact that a guy would potentially win a <900 buck lottery (the house always wins after all) and continue to play and win isn't weird. It's only weird in your mind because you're ascribing that 1/1000 chance to a lottery where you win millions, which financially wouldn't exist. It feels wrong because your extraneous suppositions are wrong, not because serial probabilities are magic
Correct, they are statistically identical, but in your day to day life, if one guy kept winning the lottery, it would (hopefully) get your noggin joggin’, because you (hopefully) understand how pattern recognition, the lottery, and humans all work, to a limited extent. It would be a clear hallmark of design, a plan behind the pattern.
Not currently the case for even the smartest minds, or a mathematically rigorous rejection of the fine-tuned universe argument would be readily available for you or anyone else to find and share (there isn’t one)
This is an assertion. I’ve proven with math that in fact, the possibility is so vanishingly small as to be, for all intents and purposes, impossible. Have you followed the link and actually read the OP of this post? This is just a cross-post, unfortunately stripped of all the detail present in the original version. Which is why I recommended from the start that people post there.
And here a direct example of where human intuition is typically terrible at judging probabilities. Why should my noggin be joggin more about one equally probable outcome than the other?
Definable is not defined. I suspect you can't provide me with exactly how many people live in the USA right this second. It is definable, but not currently defined, but it would be absurd to claim that is proof that there are infinite people.
No you haven't proven anything, you've made an incorrect statement that large==infinite, and insisted on sticking with it even when it's pointed out. The patience required to teach you the proper process of mathematical proof in the face of that obstinacy would not be infinite, but it is very large. And I'm afraid I just don't have it in me to put up with these deluded claims all day.
Ok, so you don’t understand limit theory, that might be a good place for you to start.
The fact that you quoted the “why” and still ask this is sad, I don’t know how to spell it out more than it already has been. Try rereading that part.
Haha, either you're very confused about limit theory or you are for the third time now trying to say that a very small probability is a limit approaching infinity without any understanding that those are fundamentally different terms.
That's like saying a number must be irrational because you got bored of counting after 10 decimal places.
And the fact that a guy would potentially win a <900 buck lottery (the house always wins after all) and continue to play and win isn't weird. It's only weird in your mind because you're ascribing that 1/1000 chance to a lottery where you win millions, which financially wouldn't exist. It feels wrong because your extraneous suppositions are wrong, not because serial probabilities are magic
Bandy confirmed clinically retarded - here you go Champ, let me spell it out for you yet again
Does baby understand the application of limits yet? Or does baby need another day with khan academy?
Dude, cmon, you don’t need to keep proving yourself retarded. It’s ok I’m fully convinced at this point.