So... yeah

So... yeah.

Is this a result of common core or terrible shilling?
Do you still get paid if you're bad at shilling?

Other urls found in this thread:

betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
youtu.be/0TjRjqVNAYE
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

PFFFFT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

i think you get half pay
but ya thats terrible

I'm the guy who posted that. You probably read it in a different way than I intended.

Welcome to Veeky Forums.

God, you're stupid.

And you people claim to be smart. This dude is right, albeit it could've been written better. It's more likely than not that with 23 randomly selected individuals, at least one combination of two of them share the same birthday.

Show your working

The odds are astronomical.

We're talking 10^11.

That's ten to the eleventh power.

I'm assuming you didn't know.

I'm probabilisticaly right.

betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/

You didn't say anything new, and you didn't really say it differently either.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

It would actually be (365.25)^22 power if you read it incorrectly.

it's actually true

remember that there are 365 days in a year, they didn't specify any particular day.

you are a fucking retard.

>unscientific excersice in psuedo-philosophy submitted as intractable proof
>literally from google

This is the stupidest thing I've ever read. The reason they got the wrong answer is they assumed each member of the 253 pairs had a different birthday instead of 23 birthdays.

the wikipedia page literally proves it with math you fucking faggot.

God dammit.

Get back to your board, /pol/. Take your shills with you.

Adults are working here.

>it doesn't make sense to me
>therefore, everyone else is wrong

You're retarded. The chance of any two randomly-selected people having the same birthday is 1 in 365.25. Obviously, as the number of people increases above 2, the chance can only get higher. None of this "astronomical 10^11" nonsense.

Its true though?

Wth?

Is this whole thread one person arguing with themself?

yes
t. OP, retard in OP's comment (I wrote that comment as bait), and bored math nerd on vacation.

ITT retards who aren't familiar with the birthday problem. This is literally kindergarten math, please kill yourselves retards.

>I don't know how math works.
GTFO of Veeky Forums, you moron.

Could I please SHUT THE FUCK UP?

youtu.be/0TjRjqVNAYE
Just gonna leave this here

Are you saying that only two or none share the same birthday?
Or are you saying that more people wouldn't decrease people with the same birthday?
I couldn't really understand your sentence.
Of course there's more chance of getting 2, you can't get 1 because it would be 0. 23 people is nearest 50% to get 2 people with same birthday.

>I wrote that comment as bait
I don't understand the point of shilling if you're not even on /pol/ anymore, CTR.

>Veeky Forums is not familiar with the birthday problem

I need to stop reading this gay board

Just read on an another site if you don't wanna get cancer.

>an another
*another

It's true under the hypothesis that birthdates are evenly distributed during the year.
Most calculations I've seen for this ignore leap years and time changes.

And also, it's been shown with real life data that birthdates are not completely uniform anyway. There's probably other considerations at play.

That data looks pretty close to uniform.

when will brainlets from /pol/ who don't even know about the birthday paradox stop invading Veeky Forums?

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=binomial%28365,+23%29%2F23^365%3C1%2F2
That's true.

Holy shit /pol/ is filled with retards and this thread proves it. No wonder you morons love Trump.

...

>50% chance with 23 people
>50% is more likely than not

lmfao l2math

Literally states that the hypothesis of uniformity is rejected

I didn't say it was uniform, I said it was "close to uniform".

I used this data and maple to check if the birthday paradox is true irl. It is!

Somehow the result is even a bit stronger. I wonder why.