Understanding through Discussion

QuickSearch

 Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] EvC Forum active members: 81 (9005 total)
 44 online now: AZPaul3, Coragyps, DrJones*, jar (4 members, 40 visitors) Newest Member: kanthesh Post Volume: Total: 881,125 Year: 12,873/23,288 Month: 598/1,527 Week: 37/240 Day: 4/14 Hour: 2/0

 Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)

EvC Forum Retired Forums Welcome visitors

# For Inquisitor, et al: What is Evolution?

Author Topic:   For Inquisitor, et al: What is Evolution?
Buzsaw
Inactive Member

 Message 61 of 81 (40167) 05-14-2003 11:18 PM Reply to: Message 59 by Coragyps05-14-2003 10:19 PM

Re: Probabilty calculations
quote:
Which has the higher density, seawater or rock?

Rock is about three times more dense than water, but 70% of the earth's surface is ocean. My understanding is that the average thickness of the earth's crust is about three miles whereas the average thickness of the continents is about twenty miles. When the flood came, the thin crust would've sank into the molten core of the earth by the huge volumn of water, pushing up the continents from the displacement of the molten core which would rise forming the mountain ranges and cooling. The volumn of the water would overcome the density of the rock, imo.

 This message is a reply to: Message 59 by Coragyps, posted 05-14-2003 10:19 PM Coragyps has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 63 by NosyNed, posted 05-15-2003 1:44 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded Message 67 by Coragyps, posted 05-16-2003 10:33 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 94 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003

 Message 62 of 81 (40176) 05-15-2003 12:51 AM Reply to: Message 60 by Rrhain05-14-2003 11:01 PM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
 No, you got it exactly right: If I have 4 darts, each has a probability of only 1/4 of hitting...10 darts means each has only a 1/10 probability of hitting...an infinite number of darts means each has an infinitesimal probability of hitting.And, indeed, a single dart means there is a guaranteed chance of hitting. But, the question put before us is to determine a solution for all possible cases.

What I don't understand is - are these hypothetical darts whose accuracy decreases as the number of them increases, or do you believe this to be fundamental property of real-life darts?

I realize this is nit-picking, but I'm curious.

Given n darts, each with a constant chance of hitting the target, the chances of all of them not hitting the target decreases as n increases. Is that what you're after?

 This message is a reply to: Message 60 by Rrhain, posted 05-14-2003 11:01 PM Rrhain has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 69 by Rrhain, posted 05-21-2003 5:35 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8948
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 7.3

 Message 63 of 81 (40179) 05-15-2003 1:44 AM Reply to: Message 61 by Buzsaw05-14-2003 11:18 PM

the flood
You're way off topic here. How about going over to the flood and explain how you can pile water up on something to make it push down on it.

 This message is a reply to: Message 61 by Buzsaw, posted 05-14-2003 11:18 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Director
Posts: 12705
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002

 Message 64 of 81 (40218) 05-15-2003 9:36 AM

And now, a word from our topic...
Hello, everyone, remember me? For Inquisitor, et al: What is Evolution? I'm getting lonely!

 Replies to this message: Message 65 by crashfrog, posted 05-16-2003 3:14 AM Admin has not yet responded

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 94 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003

 Message 65 of 81 (40376) 05-16-2003 3:14 AM Reply to: Message 64 by Admin05-15-2003 9:36 AM

Re: And now, a word from our topic...
Looks like Inquisitor is gone. Perhaps the topic should close? I think there's already other topics for some of the disputes we've spawned here.

No one who has an actual question about the theory has posted. I guess it's done, then?

 This message is a reply to: Message 64 by Admin, posted 05-15-2003 9:36 AM Admin has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 66 by zephyr, posted 05-16-2003 3:44 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

zephyr
Member (Idle past 3177 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003

 Message 66 of 81 (40381) 05-16-2003 3:44 AM Reply to: Message 65 by crashfrog05-16-2003 3:14 AM

Re: And now, a word from our topic...
I was expecting that. I'd vote for closing it. Not sure how democratic it really is though so do your worst!

 This message is a reply to: Message 65 by crashfrog, posted 05-16-2003 3:14 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 68 by NosyNed, posted 05-16-2003 10:55 AM zephyr has not yet responded

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5546
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.0

 Message 67 of 81 (40411) 05-16-2003 10:33 AM Reply to: Message 61 by Buzsaw05-14-2003 11:18 PM

Re: Probabilty calculations
So six miled of water with a density of 1 kg/L is going to push 20 - 3 = 17 miles of rock with a density of 3 kg/L upwards. Try that in your kitchen, and get back to us on how much uplift you get. And keep in mind that you are starting with rock, not air, in your seabeds-to-be.

 This message is a reply to: Message 61 by Buzsaw, posted 05-14-2003 11:18 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8948
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 7.3

 Message 68 of 81 (40415) 05-16-2003 10:55 AM Reply to: Message 66 by zephyr05-16-2003 3:44 AM

Re: And now, a word from our topic...
I'd say close it to new posts until someone wants to ask the question again.

It was my thought originally that it would act as a place to refer to rather than go through the whole mess each time someone asks.

 This message is a reply to: Message 66 by zephyr, posted 05-16-2003 3:44 AM zephyr has not yet responded

Rrhain
Member (Idle past 499 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003

 Message 69 of 81 (40924) 05-21-2003 5:35 PM Reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog05-15-2003 12:51 AM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
crashfrog responds to me:

quote:
quote:
No, you got it exactly right: If I have 4 darts, each has a probability of only 1/4 of hitting...10 darts means each has only a 1/10 probability of hitting...an infinite number of darts means each has an infinitesimal probability of hitting.

And, indeed, a single dart means there is a guaranteed chance of hitting. But, the question put before us is to determine a solution for all possible cases.

What I don't understand is - are these hypothetical darts whose accuracy decreases as the number of them increases, or do you believe this to be fundamental property of real-life darts?

Hypothetical darts. It's a thought experiment designed to see how well people who make arguments of probability can calculate a simple probability.

I don't think you could come up with an actual infinite number of darts. But then again, that was the last part of the question:

How many darts must you have to be within 99% of the value of an infinite number of darts?

While we can't get an infinite number of darts, we can get arbitrarily close to that value with a finite number of darts.

quote:
I realize this is nit-picking, but I'm curious.

S'aright. You'd want to be sure you understand the questiion before answering it.

quote:
Given n darts, each with a constant chance of hitting the target,

Not just a constant chance, but a specific chance.

quote:
the chances of all of them not hitting the target decreases as n increases. Is that what you're after?

That's a general result, yes, but I'm looking for the specific answer with all work shown. Does the chance of them all not hitting decrease without limit or not?

That's why I asked the questions that I did:

Suppose I have n darts, each with a 1/n chance of striking the target. What is the probability of hitting the target at least once given 10 darts? 20 darts? An infinite number of darts? How many darts must you have to be within 99% of the value of an infinite number of darts?

------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

 This message is a reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 05-15-2003 12:51 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 70 by Vunderkind, posted 05-21-2003 8:48 PM Rrhain has not yet responded Message 74 by Percy, posted 05-22-2003 1:07 PM Rrhain has responded

Vunderkind
Unregistered

 Message 70 of 81 (40942) 05-21-2003 8:48 PM Reply to: Message 69 by Rrhain05-21-2003 5:35 PM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
quote:
Suppose I have n darts, each with a 1/n chance of striking the target. What is the probability of hitting the target at least once given 10 darts? 20 darts? An infinite number of darts? How many darts must you have to be within 99% of the value of an infinite number of darts?

Why don't you ask a Statistics Professor? Sheesh. Crashfrog is no stats professor; he's a moron, and clearly not an individual with more than a High School diploma.

But anyway, please post the answer, as I want to take it next door to my neighbor who happens to be a Stats Prof. at a major accredited university boasting of over 47,000 FULL-TIME enrollment!!!

Interesting that I even took two of his stats classes.

And not once in this thread have I seen any argument come close to containing the language consisent with that of Statistical Analysis I heard in my stats classes. What's more puzzling, is that the same arguments are too independantly simple to be of any advanced merit within the stats' field.

As if one could answer statistics with philosophy, or is it so unclear philosophy is not statistics?

The bell tolls here even for knot-it-all John. (let the typo "knot" remain as it unwittingly, but appropriately, revealed the philosophical knot John has tied himself up with). It's a true circle jerk here. Time to close the thread Admin-mommy.

Nevertheless, I can't wait to print this thread out and show it to my neighbor. Y'all just might spontaneously create a creationist by the utter incoherent foolishness of your arguments. But how one is to weave such a hopeful monster into the ToE is the question...

Good day, mates!

 This message is a reply to: Message 69 by Rrhain, posted 05-21-2003 5:35 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 71 by Mister Pamboli, posted 05-21-2003 9:43 PM You have not yet responded Message 76 by Rrhain, posted 05-24-2003 1:10 AM You have not yet responded

Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 6204 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001

 Message 71 of 81 (40954) 05-21-2003 9:43 PM Reply to: Message 70 by Vunderkind05-21-2003 8:48 PM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
quote:
Why don't you ask a Statistics Professor?
Why? Do you think the question is such that only an advanced statistican could answer it? No shame on crashfrog, in that case.
quote:
But anyway, please post the answer, as I want to take it next door to my neighbor who happens to be a Stats Prof. at a major accredited university boasting of over 47,000 FULL-TIME enrollment!!!
If he exists, he has my deepest sympathy.
quote:
Interesting that I even took two of his stats classes.
Then why don't you post the answer? Were you not paying attention during your neighbour's classes? Or is the question such that only an advanded statistician could answer it? Perhaps by took his stats classes you mean that you found his lecture notes when scavenging in his trash?
quote:
And not once in this thread have I seen any argument come close to containing the language consisent with that of Statistical Analysis I heard in my stats classes.
Ah, so you did attend them? Still, hearing is not understanding, dear child.
quote:
The bell tolls here even for knot-it-all John.
My, my: quite the independant mind, if not very consisent.
quote:
Nevertheless, I can't wait to print this thread out and show it to my neighbor.
You should do so, next time you climb the hill from your trailer park to clean his pool. And do ask him to join the forum so we can read his reply.

 This message is a reply to: Message 70 by Vunderkind, posted 05-21-2003 8:48 PM Vunderkind has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 72 by Quetzal, posted 05-22-2003 2:56 AM Mister Pamboli has not yet responded

Quetzal
Member (Idle past 4499 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002

 Message 72 of 81 (40965) 05-22-2003 2:56 AM Reply to: Message 71 by Mister Pamboli05-21-2003 9:43 PM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
And another unregistered drive-by poster decides to pop in and dispense gratuitous insults in an unsubstantive post. I wonder what it is about Springtime in the Northern Hemisphere? Must be something to do with new sap flowing, sun shining, birds singing, slimy larvae crawling out from under rocks...

 This message is a reply to: Message 71 by Mister Pamboli, posted 05-21-2003 9:43 PM Mister Pamboli has not yet responded

Director
Posts: 12705
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002

 Message 73 of 81 (41009) 05-22-2003 11:00 AM

Just a Reminder
This is the "Welcome, Vistors!" forum, not the "Free For All" forum.

Vunderkind, I'm sorry this thread isn't to your liking, but we *do* have Forum Guidelines that members are expected to follow. I know you're not registered yet, but you can still be banned, so please follow the guidelines.

Others, please don't respond in kind when you encounter posts of this nature.

------------------

Percy
Member
Posts: 19855
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.0

 Message 74 of 81 (41021) 05-22-2003 1:07 PM Reply to: Message 69 by Rrhain05-21-2003 5:35 PM

Re: An Actual Probability Calculation
 Rrhain writes:Suppose I have n darts, each with a 1/n chance of striking the target. What is the probability of hitting the target at least once given 10 darts? 20 darts? An infinite number of darts? How many darts must you have to be within 99% of the value of an infinite number of darts?

Just noticed this statistics problem for the first time, I'll give it a shot.

Here's the general solution for n, just do the math to find the answers for 10, 20 and darts:

Pn = 1 - (1 - 1/n)n

To find how many darts you must have to be within 99% of the value for darts, simply solve this equation for n:

Pn - P = .01

(1 - (1 - 1/n)n) - (1 - (1 - 1/)) = .01

The term for goes to 0, so this becomes simply:

(1 - (1 - 1/n)n) = .01

That's the answer, but I don't know how to solve the equation.

--Percy

 This message is a reply to: Message 69 by Rrhain, posted 05-21-2003 5:35 PM Rrhain has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 77 by Rrhain, posted 05-24-2003 1:23 AM Percy has responded

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 94 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003

 Message 75 of 81 (41023) 05-22-2003 1:20 PM

Come to think of it, weren't we closing this thread?

Inquisitor has stopped inquisiting. All we have now is Buzsaw coming up with value-laden misstatements of the ToE. Maybe we could give this a day or two for the probability aspect to be resolved but I'd say we're about done after that...

 Date format: mm-dd-yyyy Timezone: ET (US)