04-10-2020 02:13 PM
#601
| |
| |
04-10-2020 02:18 PM
#602
| |
Well, the only way to know the number is to have a closed, isolated population among which all relevant data is known. | |
| |
04-10-2020 02:21 PM
#603
| |
| |
04-10-2020 02:35 PM
#604
| |
I think it is the same logic. I was incorrectly assuming that any value is viable between two given numbers, let's say 0.31 and 0.33 for the sake of argument. There are an infinite amount of possible numbers in this range, so the probability of 0.32 precisely being the correct value is 0%, which incidentally is the same probability for any other precise value within the range. But the sum of all probabilities still adds up to 100%. It's similar to my other example because the numbers with a 9 in it compared to numbers without a 9 in it is essentially a one-dimensional dot on a line. | |
| |
04-10-2020 02:52 PM
#605
| |
04-10-2020 02:58 PM
#606
| |
Yup, strictly speaking, without knowing the size of the population, the chance he's right in this specific instance is < 100%. | |
04-10-2020 04:30 PM
#607
| |
I mean if we're talking about a population, well let's not forget it constantly fluctuates. Whether precisely 0.32% of a population is a whole number is a question that will depend on when it's answered. | |
| |
04-10-2020 04:53 PM
#608
| |
Yeah, I get it. Well, the population goes up by one the moment someone is born, and goes down by one the moment someone dies. Even if you parse each 'moment' into a minute-long interval, that's 60x24 =1440 intervals a day. If an average lifespan is 75 years, the chance of a given person being born or dying in a given moment is 1 in 1440 x 365.25 x 75 = 1/~39.4 million. In a population of 10 m, that would be one birth and one death about every four minutes. So it's not exactly impossible to keep up. | |
04-10-2020 05:20 PM
#609
| |
I love statistics and data but dudes. | |
| |
04-10-2020 05:27 PM
#610
| |
Wait, the set of numbers that don't contain a 9 isn't infinitely larger than the set of numbers that do contain a 9, is it? I can't conceptualize the math, but intuitive it seems it would be 9 times as large. | |
04-10-2020 06:27 PM
#611
| |
You're right that I'm wrong, but not right about the x9 intuition. | |
Last edited by OngBonga; 04-10-2020 at 06:40 PM. | |
04-10-2020 06:29 PM
#612
| |
Another way to think about it is to take a random 58million digit number. What do you suppose the probability of it not having a 9 in it is? It's going to be pretty fucking small. Nearly half of all numbers have a 9 when we have a six digit number. | |
| |
04-10-2020 06:36 PM
#613
| |
| |
| |
04-10-2020 06:54 PM
#614
| |
Ah, right, silly mistake-- I failed to count the 10 9's in the 90's | |
04-10-2020 07:47 PM
#615
| |
Yeah infinity does that. When there's an infinite number of potential outcomes, each with an equal probability of 0%, yet their sum equals 100%, that's basically another way of saying 0+0+0+0... repeated to infinity = 100. This is obviously ludicrous. You can also assume that 1 potential outcome has a 50% chance of happening, with a further infinite amount of equally likely outcomes at 0% each, making a sum total of 100%. So now 0+0+0+0 repeated to infinity = 50. It's nonsense, yet it's the only way it makes any sense. Any % value above 0 is illogical, because it immediately removes the infinity. | |
| |
04-11-2020 02:04 PM
#616
| |
If you want to hear good news, don't listen to this. | |
04-11-2020 03:52 PM
#617
| |
More fun with infinity: A normal curve is a density function and not a probability function. IOW, and as Mojo rightly (and pedantically) pointed out, many single points on the curve have 0% probability of being true in the real world. | |
04-11-2020 04:10 PM
#618
| |
CHF is congestive heart failure. | |
Last edited by OngBonga; 04-11-2020 at 04:12 PM. | |
04-11-2020 04:16 PM
#619
| |
04-11-2020 04:27 PM
#620
| |
Not exactly. There are some points along the curve that have a > 0 probability of happening (e.g., a score of 25% of n=100 would be exactly 25, and so can occur with p > 0) but they are surrounded by points that do have 0 probability (e.g., all the values from 25.000001 to 25.99999% out of n=100 are impossible; thus all have a p = 0). The only sensible way to use such curves is to consider an interval and compute the cumulative density within that interval. For practical purposes, a statistical curve like the normal curve is a smoothed out version of the truth, where the p > 0 and p = 0 neighboring values are collapsed to reflect an average for a certain interval centred on a given point in the curve. | |
04-11-2020 04:35 PM
#621
| |
I could see a third ways of looking at it. | |
04-11-2020 04:54 PM
#622
| |
I wouldn't say they're the same, rather that "size" is a concept poorly compatible with infinity. | |
04-11-2020 04:55 PM
#623
| |
In that case, we're on the same page then. | |
04-11-2020 07:53 PM
#624
| |
Well yes, but some infinities are still "bigger" than others, in some cases infinitely bigger. The example I gave showed two infinities, one twice as big as the other. Now consider the whole numbers vs the real numbers. Obviously, the whole numbers is an infinite set, but we also know there's an infinite amount of real numbers between 1 and 2. So the set of real numbers is infinitely bigger than the set of whole numbers. | |
| |
04-11-2020 07:56 PM
#625
| |
I feel like they're wrong. Doesn't really resonate within me. Not a fan. | |
| |
04-11-2020 08:01 PM
#626
| |
Fair enough, but understand that you're calling a mathematician wrong, not me. It's rather like when I argue science is wrong about something, which I'm sure I have done plenty of times for the sake of debate. | |
| |
04-12-2020 03:23 AM
#627
| |
All I got from that video is that thinking too much about infinity will put you in a mental institution. | |
04-12-2020 05:39 AM
#628
| |
I hadn't seen this one before, but I've seen several similar ones. Cantor can suck my nuts. Think of the numbers as serieses that go on forever. That's their "length", infinite. Different serieses expand further faster, but saying one or the other is longer is pointless. What they're describing is that some infinities are "wider" or "faster", but that doesn't make them "bigger", since all of them are exactly as big as possible and then some. | |
| |
04-12-2020 06:02 AM
#629
| |
This is one of those thing where neither of us are wrong and neither of us are right. I'm not sure if that makes it an appealing thing to discuss, or unappealing. | |
| |
04-12-2020 06:21 AM
#630
| |
Is an infinitely large tiger bigger than an infinitely large mouse? | |
04-12-2020 06:22 AM
#631
| |
On a more topical math question, how could you do mass testing most efficiently by having multiple people take the same CV test? | |
04-12-2020 06:30 AM
#632
| |
| |
04-12-2020 06:37 AM
#633
| |
There's also no infinitely large collections of numbers afaik. So the question stands. | |
04-12-2020 06:43 AM
#634
| |
Of course there are infinitely large collections of numbers. The set of rational numbers, the set of irrational numbers, the set of whole numbers, the set of real numbers, the set of integers, all of these are infinite sets of numbers. | |
| |
04-12-2020 06:45 AM
#635
| |
Solid reporting on how badly the UK gov't fucked up their response to CV | |
04-12-2020 06:49 AM
#636
| |
Go to Twitter with #BorisTheButcher, you'll find like minded people there who are keen to politicise this. | |
| |
04-12-2020 07:02 AM
#637
| |
Is it possible to criticise the PM without politicising it? If so, let me know how that's done. Otherwise, I guess you'll just dismisss every criticism of the gov't as being "political." | |
04-12-2020 07:23 AM
#638
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 08:05 AM
#639
| |
Just in case it isn't clear to you by now, I'm not criticising his 'politics'. I'm criticising his 'disaster management.' If one is influenced by the other, that's bad. But regardless, the latter is objectively a serious problem here whether you accept it or not. | |
04-12-2020 09:47 AM
#640
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 10:15 AM
#641
| |
South Korea seems to have handled it well. | |
| |
04-12-2020 10:53 AM
#642
| |
I don't think Italy should be the standard everyone should hold themselves up to. I don't see how anyone can say the response by the US and UK governments wasn't abysmal. There were clear guidelines by the WHO and the CDC. The UK and the US chose to ignore them. Other countries did not. The results are pretty obvious. | |
| |
04-12-2020 10:59 AM
#643
| |
Italy was the first country in Europe where this took off, followed quickly by Spain and Swz. The rest of Europe had at least two weeks to see what was coming. The UK is very close to the bottom of the list of places that made proper use of that time lag. | |
04-12-2020 11:04 AM
#644
| |
04-12-2020 11:05 AM
#645
| |
Trump was getting told from many directions, including the economic sector, the intelligence sector, the WHO, etc. | |
| |
04-12-2020 11:36 AM
#646
| |
I'm reading that article poop. | |
| |
04-12-2020 12:05 PM
#647
| |
He can say he was given bad advice, but he still has to take responsibility. He's the Prime Minister ffs, that's his job. | |
04-12-2020 01:22 PM
#648
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 01:25 PM
#649
| |
This is what I mean by "it's not the time to point fingers". When this is over, there will be a public inquiry. If Boris is shown to have acted in a negligent way, he should resign. If he has acted criminally, he should be prosecuted. But the time for this discussion, at least in public, is not now. | |
| |
04-12-2020 01:32 PM
#650
| |
https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/stat...77586586832896 | |
| |
04-12-2020 01:36 PM
#651
| |
https://twitter.com/Andysshot/status...81431844966400 | |
| |
04-12-2020 01:38 PM
#652
| |
I really don't know what to believe, to be quite honest. This is why social media is not the place to draw conclusions. This is why an independent public inquiry is essential when this is over. There's so much information out there, much of it contradictory, you have to take everything with a pinch of salt. | |
| |
04-12-2020 01:43 PM
#653
| |
Says the news report I posted that you claimed to have read. | |
04-12-2020 01:44 PM
#654
| |
04-12-2020 01:46 PM
#655
| |
In b4 mojo moves your tweets to the 'stupid tweets arrrrgggh!' thread. | |
04-12-2020 01:54 PM
#656
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 01:58 PM
#657
| |
It should be noted that those who are critical of the government are largely liberal minded people who oppose the government anyway. | |
| |
04-12-2020 02:06 PM
#658
| |
The article I posted was from Reuters. They're pretty well established as an objective source. | |
04-12-2020 02:51 PM
#659
| |
Yes, I agree. I was being a little flippant, but with that said, just because Reuters published it, doesn't mean it's the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I will acknowledge though that Reuters is a more respectable news agency than most, but it's still not an independent public inquiry. | |
| |
04-12-2020 02:58 PM
#660
| |
| |
04-12-2020 03:04 PM
#661
| |
I don't really like the notion that when leaders are obviously screwing up at something this important, that we should just let them finish what they started before we look into maybe holding them accountable. | |
| |
04-12-2020 03:27 PM
#662
| |
04-12-2020 03:32 PM
#663
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 03:40 PM
#664
| |
IDK about Boris so much aside from what I read here on FTR. | |
| |
04-12-2020 03:49 PM
#665
| |
Good thing Boris isn't on this forum then. He's not going to get removed from office over this, but at least the press and/or the opposition could try to hold the government to account. | |
04-12-2020 04:06 PM
#666
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 04:10 PM
#667
| |
| |
| |
04-12-2020 04:11 PM
#668
| |
04-12-2020 04:13 PM
#669
| |
Public opinion for Boris is largely split based on political opinions. Those who voted for him clapped, those who didn't stayed inside and watched tv. | |
| |
04-12-2020 04:15 PM
#670
| |
Shaking hands with covid patients is not the same as saying antibiotics are the way to treat a virus. Some might even say it's a gesture of kindness and bravery, though I wouldn't quite go that far. So long as he washed his hands afterwards, he's taking a very small risk. | |
| |
04-12-2020 04:19 PM
#671
| |
Yeah it was a real cacophony. I could hear that old man banging his pot from where I live. | |
04-12-2020 04:21 PM
#672
| |
04-12-2020 04:22 PM
#673
| |
04-12-2020 04:23 PM
#674
| |
I don't even need to hit the link, I know exactly who you're on about. I think the winning Twitter comment was "I wonder what chest size his trousers are". | |
| |
04-12-2020 04:24 PM
#675
| |
| |