You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
100 points

Having two possible outcomes does not mean it’s a 50:50 chance.

“So if I aim the arrow at the 1cm square from 100m away and shoot, I either hit it or I don’t. So basically I have a 50% chance of hitting it.”

permalink
report
reply
8 points

The thing with that is that it’s actually a useful generalization to make in a lot of scenarios.

If you know nothing about the distinction between two possible outcomes, treating them as equally likely is a helpful tool to continue with the back of the envelope guess. Knowing this path needs 5 coin tosses to go right and this one needs 10 is helpful to approximate which is better.

Your example is obviously outside the realm where you have zero information, so uniform distribution is no longer the reasonable default. But the idea is from a reasonable technique, taken to extremes by someone who doesn’t fully get it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Either I become president, or I don’t.

Therefore, the odds of me becoming president is 50%

Brb committing 34 felonies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

You’ve already failed.

You have to commit hundreds of felonies. In broad daylight. And brag about it.

Threaten witnesses. Delay everything.

And only be convicted of 34.

Then not get sentenced.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

Very weird fun fact about arrows/darts and statistics, theres 0% chance of hitting an exact bullseye. You can hit it its possible to throw a perfect bullseye. It just has a probability of zero when mathematically analyzed due to being an infinitesimally small point. Sound like I’m making shit up? Here’s the sauce

How can an outcome both be entirely possible and have 0% probability?

Q.E.D

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You must not be playing on a soft tip board.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Key word here is “infinitesimally.” Of course if you’re calculating the odds of hitting something infinitesimally small you’re going to get 0. That’s just the nature of infinities. It is impossible to hit an infinitesimally small point, but that’s not what a human considers to be a “perfect bullseye.” There’s no paradox here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Also the circumference of the dart tip is not infinitesimally small, so theres a definite chance of it overlapping the ‘perfect bullseye’ by hitting any number of nearby points.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Oh. That’s what they mean. That’s dumb lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Another lesson I the importance of significant digits, a concept I’ve had to remind many a young (and sometimes an old) engineer about. An interesting idea along similar lines is that 2 + 2 can equal 5 for significantly large values of 2.

permalink
report
parent
reply
91 points

My wife, father-in-law and I were playing a board game with my brother-in-law. In this game, we were playing as detectives who have to try to find his character, but each turn he could move in secret in one of several directions. We were a few turns in at one point and he could have been in any of dozens of places at this point. We drove him nuts by saying “he’s either in this spot or he’s not, it’s a 50-50 chance.” He kept arguing “I could be in a ton of places! It’s not a 50-50 chance!” But we just kept pretending we didn’t understand and arguing that there were only two possibilities, he’s there or he’s not, so it was clearly a 50-50 chance. He got quite angry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

you know, if you watched for tells, that could tilt the probabilities… and I bet with the frustration… he was flashing tells all over the place…

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Letters from Whitechapel?

Either that or you buried the lede by failing to mention something rather significant about the hidden character, and you were playing Fury of Dracula. Or my boardgamegeek-fu isn’t as strong as I hoped.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Yeah it was Letters from Whitechapel.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Scotland Yard or Letters from Whitechapel?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I love Scotland Yard. We got it for a friend who loves detective stories. Then discovered that it’s a public transit simulator which is even better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Letters from Whitechapel

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

On the other hand: Half of my lottery tickets were jackpots. I never played and have (1/2 * 0 = ) 0 jackpots.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.7K

    Posts

  • 93K

    Comments