|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
5th February 2010, 02:00 PM | #81 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 839
|
The arithmetic has been done.
See Epstein, R A: The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic. My memory is that the expected score is about 8.3 out of 25 (eg Zenner cards): the maths is beyond me, but simulation shows that it works. If anyone wants the reference, I'll get it. |
5th February 2010, 02:03 PM | #82 |
"más divertido"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
|
Just ask your classmates to prove it. Seems simple enough.
- Work out the math for 57% likelihood (of predicting Heads / Tails) based on standard distribution - Make a few bets. - Flip a coin and count. - Profit!! |
5th February 2010, 04:51 PM | #83 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
Yes, I think that is the way to go. Obviously the professor and the classmates have gotten the wrong end of the stick about something or other.
But my guess is that they would not agree to it. It is often embarrassing to admit you have been wrong about something like this. I actually started flipping coins and guessing the result. By the time I got to 25 coins I had guessed 60% correctly and was half thinking maybe there was something in it after all. But by the time I got to 50 coins I was back to 50% accuracy. I haven't done the maths, but I am guessing that even at 100 flips you might get as many as 57% correct guesses. |
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
5th February 2010, 04:57 PM | #84 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
I once claimed to my brother that there was a certain plant that was estimated to have lived since prehistoric times. When he challenged me I went to look for the research and found that I had simply misremembered and that the root system was estimated to have lived only since Roman times.
The great temptation was to simply say that I couldn't find the research and let the matter drop, especially since my brother has a habit of rubbing in silly mistakes like that. In the end I 'fessed up about my mistake but it was a close decision. I suspect the professor is in a similar position to this. |
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
5th February 2010, 05:02 PM | #85 |
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,149
|
Amusingly, you may have been right.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...dest-tree.html 9,500 years is, if not prehistoric, close. But it's a good story. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|