Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Statistics problem

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 14:45 ID:JvVN5GXx

I have a statistics problem that I just can not figure out the answer to: What is the probability that a namefag is neither a troll nor a moron? I think the answer is 0, but I haven't been able to prove it yet.

Name: FrozenVoid 2007-03-03 14:55 ID:3AQRSFA0

I'm flattered the subject mentions my kind in person.

namefag probability of being moron=x/100
namefag probability of being troll=y/100
namefag probability of being moron or troll=(x+y)/100
namefag probability of being moron and troll=(x/100*y/100)/100 *
namefag probability of being neither moron/troll=(100-(x+y))/100
*If the distribution is uniform(unbiased).


Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 15:13 ID:pzYL2oR4

The theoretical probability is undoubtedly very low.  But as the above poster so kindly proves, it must be very close to 0.

Name: FrozenVoid 2007-03-03 15:28 ID:3AQRSFA0

fixed
1.namefag probability of being moron=x/100
2.namefag probability of being troll=y/100
3.namefag probability of being moron or troll=(x+y)/100- (x/100*y/100)
4.namefag probability of being moron and troll=(x/100*y/100) *
5.namefag probability of being neither moron/troll=(100-(x+y)/100- (x/100*y/100))/100
6.*If the distribution is uniform(unbiased).

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 16:06 ID:JvVN5GXx

>>4
x = 100%, y = 100%. It is certainly the case that the probability that a namefag is neither a troll nor a moron is 0%, since there is a 0% chance that he/she/it isn't a troll. By your formula (step 5), the probability of a namefag being neither a troll nor a moron is (100 - (100 + 100)/100 - (100/100 * 100/100))/100 = (100 - (200/100) - (1 * 1))/100 = (100 - 2 - 1)/100 - 97/100 = 97%.

Of course, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you fail at elementary statistics, seeing as you fail at every other form of math.

Name: FrozenVoid 2007-03-03 16:18 ID:3AQRSFA0

>>5
Thats just proves you lack common sense.This isn't /b/.
There people who aren't trolls and morons.(though its doubtful they would stay for long here).

Name: FrozenVoid 2007-03-03 16:39 ID:3AQRSFA0

Lets improve the statistics by reducing amount of namefags by 1.
You know that probability might improve.
Only namefags can be morons and trolls,of course and 100% of them are.
Less namefags=less trolls and morons.Goodbye.

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 16:52 ID:Heaven

>>6
No, it's proof that you lack the ability to do middle school level algebraic manipulation without fucking up.

Name: FrozenVoid 2007-03-03 17:35 ID:VrrkNVZw

>>8
Mainstream mathematics is a religion.
If you cant even handle questioning this,you're just a sheep.(like all the math professors and their students).

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 18:04 ID:pzYL2oR4

>>9
I'm bitter because I don't understand it. I don't want anyone else to use it, only because I can't.

Fixed

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-03 18:05 ID:JvVN5GXx

>>9
Questioning mainstream mathematics when you couldn't even pass middle school algebra is like questioning mainstream astrophysics when you think that the earth is flat.

(in b4 "but the earth is flat!")

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-05 21:17 ID:uZE488I6

>>9
I lol'd.

Name: Anonymous 2007-03-06 10:33 ID:k/kSZzk0

>>9
Maths is probably the most simplest straight forward thing to prove. If you have a problem looking at what is needed to prove a particular formula then either you have some sort of emotional problem making you not want to trust "evil maths" or your reasonning skills are that of a banana peel.

Name: Anonymous 2009-02-10 16:39

>>13
But he does have a point.
We were all taught that 1+2=3, what if we're wrong and it's actually 7?

Name: freshwater pearls 2009-02-11 6:13

<a href="http://www.jewelrypearl.ca/">freshwater pearls</a> <a href="http://www.jewelrypearl.ca/">pearl necklace</a> <a

href="http://www.jewelrypearl.ca/">pearl strands</a> <a href="http://www.jewelrypearl.ca/">akoya pearls</a> <a

href="http://www.jewelrypearl.ca/">pearl jewelry</a>

Name: Anonymous 2009-02-15 14:19

>>14
The symbol "2" was *defined* to be 1+1. The symbol "3" was *defined* to be 1+1+1.
1+2=1+1+1=3.

(Now, 1 can be defined as |{{}}| (the cardinality of the set whose only element is the empty set).)

All math is definitions and logic. It works.

Name: Anonymous 2009-02-15 14:40

wat.

Name: Anonymous 2009-02-15 19:51

>>17
What do Buddist monasteries have to do with it?

Name: 男1號 2011-05-09 21:38

Name: 漢方精力剤 2011-05-09 21:39


Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List