ya there are a lot of variables. However, if you really wanted to sit down and enumerate them, then assign a probablility to each, you can do that. It's not like trying to decide how likely it is that God scratched his butt when he woke up this morning.
I think I forgot to post a link about the Drake equation, which is the grand-daddy of such equations, attempting to express the probability of life on other planets. I just found the following interactive calculator, which is pretty nifty as a web app in and of itself. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/origins/drake.html Anyway, never having been in the military I don't think I am the person to devise odds of surviving being shot at, but I'd think factors might include marksmanship of the shooter, wind, odds of other objects intervening and the like. Dana On 11/12/06, Denny Valliant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/12/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Denny wrote: > > > Does math prove that just by counting, we're changing the outcome, or > > > am I conflating different maths? > > > > > > > The point Dana and Robert are making relates to independent events, > > e.g., each flip of a coin. In that case, each flip is it's own event > > with the same probability of the "favorable" outcome. > > > > The trick comes in when you want to string multiple events together; > > or dependent events. When you do this your odds decrease. E.g., > > Here's the probability table for flipping successive heads in a row: > > > > 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, ..., 1/1024 for 10 heads in a row. > > Ok, I get the basic math shown here, but I don't think statistics are > that precise, or something like that. I've got a post I wasn't going > to send, in reply to the thread I spawned this off of, and silly as it > is I'll copy it below. > Basically I think I'm trying to get across the basic un-specificness > of statistics, a point that I'm sure you all are aware of, and thus, the > lack of posting-ness. > > Maybe a better example, instead of the stuff I wrote, would be, what > if you come up against a crack coin tosser. There are peeps out > there, believe it or not, who can control the toss of the coin. If you > put total faith in your stats, as some sort of solid thing, vs. a sorta > cloud of possibilities, or whatever, you'd be surprised. > > Bah. It's really a sad little post, please don't look askance at me > for a poor attempt at explaining something that needs no explination, > and poor visualization, y todo. If you laugh, sweet, I think I was aiming > at funny more than content, and just fell quite a bit short. The attitude > I think come across sorta <fart sound />, didn't mean it in a bad way > tho. I wasn't trying to imply stuff, etc. Eh. > > For posterity, and beyond!: > > On 11/12/06, Gruss Gott Guesses <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > G-man wrote: > > > .999983^365=.993814 or 99.3814% chance of living. That means a soldier > > > has > > > > > > 1-.993814=.006186 or 0.6% chance of dying based on current statistics. > > > > Oh! So let's see if my "theory" holds up ... the longer a soldier > > stays in Iraq the higher I'm saying his probability of being killed > > is. Let's see! > > LIES! ALL LIES! > > The longer one casts the die, the better one gets at it! ;] > > Anyone on-list think that perception or observation can sway something > as 50/50 as a coin toss? Like, if we all form a prayer circle, random > number generators will be less random, and stuff of that nature? > > Well, all that aside, stats are a form of witchcraft. Anyone who > takes them at face value is mistaken as to the nature oh, sheet, I'm > not a math head, why am I so sure? Bah. I really don't know. Stats > would probably be fun. Differential equations sound cool. > > It's hard not to stick stuff in a vacuum, and think that's how it > works in the wild, no matter what, I guess. Eh... I don't know. > > You tell me, G-man- does it really boil down to the individual? Or, > does the individual not sway the statistics? Is it really true that > skill and all that stuff wouldn't skew that stastistic in some manner? > And what if 15 men die at once, in a crash of some sort. Stuff like > that. > > I don't know, really... I still think insurance is a scam, so that's > probably tainting my view of statistics and whatnot. I mean, I see > their power, but I also soooo see how tempting it is to misinterpret > or gleen info that's not really there, sorta. > > Well, Everything is like that, so, what makes this stuff any > different? Generally, you're right, but I'd posit that in the > singular, it's just too tough to tell. Heh. Guess the quantum stuff > does sorta apply, right? Variables, too many variables! > > Yeah, I just like math, I don't practice it. Obviously. Sorry for > the clue-lacking-ness of this post, for those who do practice. =] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:220484 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
