Probability

see

>Staring at the answer instead of what makes it

Yes, and? The reply your replied to still applies to this.

>if a set of numbers is infinite it contains all the numbers

>shuffles a deck of cards
>Wow this order had a 1 in 80658175170943878571660636856403766975289505440883277824000000000000 chance of happening wow life is truly a miracle we are all blessed

>>Multiverse theory being true
>Then god is real, etc.
Nigga, the multiverse theory is precisely popsci's second most pathetic excuse to reject God's existence in an infalsibiable way.

>Brainlets can't even into anthropic principle

You are going to feel like a bunch of dumb niggers when you read this

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

...

If you could factor in all the variables that made your existence possible the likelihood of your existence becomes exactly 100%.

Why do people still do under the chin? Why risk it?

>Staring at the answer instead of at your navel
Lrn2answer fgt pls

what would be improbable is that everything in the universe aligned the same way again, brainlet

>If there are infinite universes and there is the smallest chance of something happening,it will happen.

This is actually not true. Example: There are infinite integers, but there is no integer bigger than 2 but smaller than 3. Also known as [math] infinite \neq exhaustive [/math]

難道你們沒有想過這是多麼不可能的你的存在?

如果我的父親在他的壽命做了一件事情不同的,我就不會在這裡寫這篇文章。 如果我的母親在她的壽命做了一件事情不同的,我就不會在這裡寫這篇文章。

你可以去,這棵樹人類歷史。 在這樣的現實,有可能是一個低於0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%的機會,你會是其中的一部分,但你無論如何在這裡。

我只是不能動搖我們生活在一個循環,無限的宇宙,隨著時間的無限量做出這樣的事情發生的感覺。

>Everything in the universe aligned the same way again

This is what I can't agree with.
Its only been proven in very simple, physical models that an infinite amount of time and an infinite amount of space can result in something that never re-aligns.

But if you shuffle a deck of cards over and over with an infinite amount of time, that order will recur.

the universe is big, lots of time has passed
nothing to see here

But is it really the case? I mean, everyday different parts of human body changes and all that remains constant is structure. Which particles form it - doesn't really matter. Maybe even if your father was another person you would still finally became you

>0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance that you'd be a part of it, but you're here anyway.
Other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% weren't born for that to happen. Unlikeliness doesn't equal impossibility, specially in a universe as big and old as ours.

Yes but that's a 3d space with 52 partitions, is it true in n dimensional space with m partitions?

I've no clue, and that's the issue.
No one really knows because there are too many variables.

We very well could live in a cyclic reality that changes slightly throughout repetitions and not know it.

If there are an infinite number of things that COULD happen, does that also not imply an infinite variance?

but we do exist, so clearly the odds are 100%

>Infinite number of things

The universe is objectively finite, and a finite amount of matter over an infinite amount of time would yield recurrence.

>objectively finite
in time only
there is no observation or reason as to why the universe would be finite in volume and mass

>Do you guys ever think about how improbable it is that you exist?
Exactly as probable as literally any other person.

not people that survived seeing your ugly face
>top kek

>improbable it is that you exist?

>wish I was born female
>living in well off family
>later find out I was adopted from extremely poor women who only gave me up because she didn't want a son

>contemplate suicide
>drive to bridge to jump from
>tire blows out on the way there

Sometimes I think the multi-verse theory is true, and in the vast majority of universes I did commit suicide. The person that's myself can only exist in a universe where I didn't die, so from my perspective, and ONLY my perspective, I'll appear I have some sort of quantum immortality or quirky fate thing happen every time a near death event occurs. But in reality tons of my other selves in other realities are dieing all the time and each near death experience greatly reduces the number of versions of me that exist in the multi-verse.

I wonder, if each time a version of me dies in another universe or some near death experience kills off tons of versions of me where it wasn't quite near-death for them, does that diminish me somehow?

>你不可能存在嗎?

>希望我出生的女性
生活在家庭幸福中
後來發現我是從極其貧窮的女人身上收養的,因為她們不想要一個兒子,所以才把我放棄了

考慮自殺
>駕駛橋樑跳躍
在那裡,輪胎吹了

有時候我覺得這個多層次的理論是真實的,在絕大多數的宇宙中,我確實是自殺的。我自己的人只能存在於我沒有死的宇宙中,所以從我的角度來看,只有我的觀點,我會看到每當發生一個近乎死亡的事件時,我就會出現某種量子不死或古怪的命運。但實際上,在其他現實中,我的另一些自己正在死亡,每一次臨近的死亡經歷都大大減少了在多節段中存在的我的版本的數量。

我想知道,如果每當我的一個版本在另一個宇宙中死亡,或者一些近乎死亡的經驗殺死了我不是很接近死亡的大量版本的話,那麼這會不會使我減少?

西蒙的姐妹
>你不能存在?

>我要出生的女性
生活在家庭幸福
後來我發現,我被一個非常可憐的女人通過,因為他們不希望一個兒子,所以我就放棄了

考慮自殺
>駕駛跳橋
在那裡,輪胎爆裂

有時我覺得這多層次的理論是正確的,而且在大多數的宇宙我做自殺。 我自己的人只能存在於其中,我不是死了,從我的角度來看這樣的宇宙,從我的角度來看,我會看到,每當一個瀕臨死亡的事件發生時,我都會有某種量子死亡或 奇怪的命運。 但事實上,在其他國家,一些我自己已奄奄一息,而每過死亡經驗,極大地降低了我的版本中存在的多個片段的數量。

我不知道這是否會每次在另一個宇宙我的版本之一死亡減少了我,或者一些瀕死體驗殺死了大量的,我不是很接近死的版本。

>Nigga, the multiverse theory is precisely popsci's second most pathetic excuse to reject God's existence in an infalsibiable way.
This is so true and it's sad people don't see through it.

>Physics starts giving strange results that imply we live in an unnatural universe
>Higgs Boson gives the final nail in the coffin for naturalism
>Physicists start fleeing for the multiverse theory because "If we presume the existence of infinite universes than the fact ours is so strange is irrelevant!"
It's cowardice to actually avoid the conclusion their results are pointing to

>You could go-up the tree through human history. In this reality, there's probably a less than 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance that you'd be a part of it
This only seems weird if you don't recognize how you're largely interchangeable with any other human being on the planet.
The chances of some person or another being around today starting with the condition humans as species already exist is pretty fucking high. Whether this given person is you or some other person is pretty irrelevant, like being amazed that THIS particular grain of sand is in the desert and not some other grain of sand.

>tfw I had a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance of existing
>tfw the fact I live, think and feel and get to experience existence is nothing short of a miracle
>tfw spend most of my incredible opportunity to exist shitposting on Veeky Forums and fapping to lewd anime

No, did you even read my post?
Your chance of existing isn't anything special unless you wrongly differentiate between you and all the other people you're almost entirely interchangeable with.
Refer to the desert analogy. This isn't anything to be impressed by.

>這臉,當我有現有的0.0000000000000000000000001%的機會
>這臉,當我活,想法和感受,並體驗到生存的事實是不折不扣的奇蹟
>這臉,當把大量的令人難以置信的機會存在shitposting對Veeky Forums的和fapping以猥褻動漫
//
> That face, when I have an existing .0000000000000000000000001% chance
> That face, when I live, think and feel, and experience the fact of survival is truly a miracle
> That face, when the presence shitposting and fapping on Veeky Forums's plenty of opportunity to obscene incredible animation
//
I'm Impressed, Still.

>unless you wrongly differentiate between you and all the other people you're almost entirely interchangeable with
But I do. The fact that I get to exist rather than some other shlub is a pretty big deal to me. Subjectively the fact that I exist rather than don't exist is actually the biggest deal in the world. I had a 99.9999999999999999999% chance of not existing at all, yet here I am, isn't that something to be celebrated, cherished and feel awed at? Feel free to equate yourself to a grain of sand if you want but I'm infinitely more important than that, in fact I am the most important thing in the universe from the only point of view that has merit, my own.

>isn't that something to be celebrated, cherished and feel awed at?
No, I explained this already.
You're making up a nonsensical probability based on the wrong premise that different instances of the same species aren't almost entirely interchangeable, certainly relative to the universe, and even relative to as narrow a scope as this particular planet.
People are born all the fucking time, it's not anything special.
>the only point of view that has merit, my own
Please stop using all of your technology then, it was built using a point of view where you aren't important and therefore "has no merit."

"Where's MY invitation to the orgy (As Advertised)?"
As Advertised : Where's MY invitation to the orgy (Can't See+Time)?
//
“哪里是我的邀请狂欢(如广告)?”
像广告:哪里是我的邀请狂欢(无法看到+时间)?

>aren't almost entirely interchangeable
But they're not? The difference between existing and not existing is huge. My consciousness is unique. It's not "interchangeable" with anyone elses. From my perspective existing is a big deal because the chance of my particular consciousness not existing was so high. Likewise yours. Do you really feel as though there would be zero difference to you, personally had you not existed? Why not just end yourself then?

What a sick cunt

I think I've found your picture

...

imagine having that small of a chance of being human and being born in this gay ass time in history.

buWHAT IF user DADU WAS KILL?

omg this is funny af

A part of me is screaming "Kill yourself and return to your slumber", but another part of me is scared, and hilariously positive.

"Anything is possible! You were only fourteen 7 years ago! What did you know of reality at such a point in time? Who knows what's going to happen in the future?"

It's really any excuse to not die, and it's all very powerful.

Please go back to r*ddit.

De Impossibilitate Vitae and De Impossibilitate Prognoscendi ( ("On the Impossibility of Life" and "On the Impossibility of Prognostication"): two books (by a fictional author Cezar Kouska) reviewed in one review, both dealing with alternative history. This pseudoreview was published in English under the title Odds in 1978 in The New Yorker.[3]
The former consists almost entirely of tracking all the things that must have happened for the author (Kouska) to have been born: his father must have married his mother, which in turn depended on them meeting during the War, which in turn depended on multitude of other events. Here Lem argues for the butterfly effect: changing one thing has an almost infinite number of unimaginable consequences. De Impossibilitate Vitae is a fictionalized piece of Lem's own biography.[4]
The latter is an argument that futurology cannot be based on the probability theory, but rather of some other approach, quoting Lem: "namely, to quote Kouska, 'theory, based on antipodal axioms, of the distribution of ensembles in actual fact unparalleled in the space-time continuum of higher-order events.' (The quotation also serves to show that the reading of the work, in the theoretical sections, does present certain difficulties.)"[3]
Professor Kouska is the namesake of "Kouska's fallacy" in reasoning about concurrent happening of two highly improbable real-life events: in calculating of the probability of such a happening it is fallacious to assume that they are independent.[5][6]

(A Perfect Vacuum, Stanislaw Lem)

(“不可能談論生活”和“不可能談論預言”):兩本書(由一位虛構的作者“國王的課程”)在一篇評論中評論過,這兩本書都處理不同的歷史。這個錯誤的概念是“紐約人”在1978年出版了英文與“賠率”。 [3]
前者幾乎完全是在追踪他一生中發生的事情:他的父親必須娶母親,而他的母親在戰爭期間依靠他們的會議,而這又依賴於別人的事務。在這裡,萊姆考慮了蝴蝶效應:改變一件事情的幾乎無法想像的結果。不可能的問題是一個虛構的狐猴自己的傳記。 [4]
後者是一個論點,未來學不能基於概率論,而是一些其他的方法,引用雷姆:“引用課程”,根據反對公理理論在實際的合奏無與倫比的高階事件的時空連續。 “(這個引文也表明,在理論部分,閱讀這部作品確實有些困難。)”[3]
課程教授是“課程謬誤”的共同作者,推測兩個極不可能的事件同時發生:在計算這類事件的概率時,假設它們是獨立的和獨立的是錯誤的[5] [6] 6 ]。

(完美的真空:斯坦,是法勒,呃,呃)
//
切扎爾場,景類

...whenever you're ready...

This is like rolling your face on your keyboard for 5 minutes with a text file open, looking at your screen, and collapsing in shock at the infinitesimal probability of typing that exact sequence of characters. You could do this a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion more times and never reproduce it. Wow!!! #Blessed

The chance that I exist is 1

這就像在鍵盤上滾動你的臉5分鐘,用文本文件打開,看著你的屏幕,並在鍵入的字符,準確的序列的微小概率震驚崩潰。 你可以這樣做一兆兆兆兆兆兆兆次,從來沒有重現。 哇!#Blessed

我的存在的機會是1

>Do you guys ever think about how improbable it is that you exist?
probability = events / sample size
probability =1/1
Hmmmmmm

>難道你們有沒有想過這是多麼不可能的你的存在?
概率=事件/樣品大小
概率= 1/1的
Hmmmmmm

Probability = 0

The Probability That Statisticians Agree On 0 As The 'Nearest-K Discriminant' is 1 And Represent Their Function As 'P'

1 = The statistician thinks of 0 as the "closest x-Discriminator" reaches 1 before writing the letter P.

1 =統計員0認為如“最接近的x鑑別”達到1寫字母P.之前

I sure wish I spoke moon

%= 1 0 0檢驗員簽字“起來!認證”G

我當然希望我能讀月亮符文
我當然希望我發言
我當然希望我的月亮
在月亮說我講的月亮

So does he.

所以呢他。因此,沒有他

that's chinese

這是中國

幼兒園入園認證

>這是中國
不是 , 那是台灣

Even if you randomly select from an infinite pool, with 0% chance of getting any individual result, there is a 100% percent chance that one will be picked.

Anonymous 01/07/18(Sun)20:03:04 No.9420232
(You)
>这是中国
不是 , 那是台湾

Detect language (dictionary language)

1 ~ United Kingdom
1〜英國

//
10^(10^8.456484720206186)

Why is zeta(1/2 + 10^(10^8.456484720206186)) = 1 interesting? Isn't it zeta(1/2 + i*x) = 0 thats interesting?

值
value

Why is zeta(1/2 + 10^(10^8.456484720206186)) = 1 interesting? Isn't it zeta(1/2 + i*x) = 0 thats interesting?值?gnitseretni staht 0 = )x*i + 2/1(atez ti t'nsI ?gnitseretni 1 = ))681602027484654.8^01(^01 + 2/1(atez si yhW

,,¡pioɹǝʇǝuƃɐW uɹǝɥʇɹoN,, 'ollǝH

Hello, "Northern Magneteroid!"

.i.0N I X I NO.i.
.i.ON I X I N0.i.
//
˙i0N I X I NOi˙
˙iON I X I N0i˙
//
˙͉̠͓͍͉̼̪ͭ͑ͭ̇̿ͤ̒͑̿̄ͧ̈́̉́̀͠i̷̩̬̩̭̼̯͈͍͇̗̺ͣ̐ͬͤ͒̎̽̓̎ͨ̓͂̒ͭ̓ͣ͋͘͟͡͠ͅͅ0̴̶̸̴̢̭͙̬̭͎͍̳͓̹̹͖̥͉̯͋̃͒̎̔͌ͯN̴̸̢͉̝̹̝͐ͣ̓̈͋̂̂̽ͪ̀͝ ̨̧̞̬͙͙̰̮̹̮͇̞̬̱̺͉͖͚͎͎̗ͨ̓̽̈̓̚͘͡I̸̶̺͎̯͍̹̙̞̼͓͇̓̋͊́ͅ ̷̧͈͕̪̰̳͓̯͖̝̗͈̟͖̃̍̃̊͊̇ͤ̃̇ͣ̏ͮ̆̑̚X̵̵͉̰͉̳̤͉̫͉̺̜͖̯̐̊͑̈́̋̋̂ͧ͜͢ ̰̪̖̝ͮͯ͆̇̓̄͐͊͊ͧͪ͂͢İ̳̠̹̻̪̯̂͊ͤͭ̊͋̃ͩͨ̒͒ͭͪ̚͜ ̴̧̝̣̣͍͉̘͕̖̇̄̈ͭ̓̔̈́̎̾ͨ̍̄͐̾ͬ̉ͦ͘͡N̙̞̹̭̬͙͇̐͋͋̇́ͤ̒ͮ̈́̋̋̃̓͑ͨ̌́͞͡Ơ̖̠̬̟̠̙̖̬̯͉͋́̒̉̾̐ͮ̔͜͡i̸͇̖̪͙̞̘̻̠͖̩̻̞͚̽̿̎͡˙̸̵̥̘̟͛̊̆̀ͭ̇̈́
̴͎̜̭̗̖̹͈̟ͣ͋͒̏ͩ͗̔̈ͩ́͘͢˙̛̜͔͓̤͉ͨ͒ͤ͡i͍̤̼̱͕̮̤̘̝̬͖̙̠̪̩̩̤ͯ͂̂ͣ̈ͯ̉͂̏͛͊ͪ̕̕Ȍ̢̱̤͕̬͕͇͔̞͐̐̏́̚N̴̶̨̮̣̭̝̹̠̳̆ͪ͐ͬ͗̚ ̴̯̜͙̻͇̬̠͙̻̻͖͕͕̞̳͖̙̓̓̿͛̈́ͫ͊ͅͅĮ̳͈͈̩͒̃͆ͫͯ̾̇̇̑ͮ̈̇̀͘͡ ͖͈̝̼̰̻͔̾̏̔̃͑̄͑͌̿͘̕͜ͅX̶̸̴̫̜̪̦̆ͭ̽͒ͦ̄̈́͊́̔͜ ̨̧̞̬̘̥̝̙̼̱̳͔̖̣͛̾͒ͭ͆̎͑͞I̴̝̘͉̮̫̠̎̐͋̓ͬ̑͊̌̊̃̂̏̎͑̍̀̕͡ ̷̢̦̬̣̆̈Ń̷͍͉̠̮͍̞̙̟̞̫̪̣̤͍͎̜ͩ̆͊̀ͬ̽̉ͫ͌ͨͭ͝ͅ0̵̙̱̤͙͖̯͕͕̭̘̈́͐̾̀͋ͧ̓͛ͦ̋̈̐̊̍̔̀͢i̵̼̖̥͖͙̘͈̣͉̿̈́ͣ̋̄̓͐͒͋̌͂̈́ͧ͑̄̏͑̀͜͡ͅ˙̡̬̺͙̦̱͕͍ͧͨͪͬ͊͂̂ͮ̈́ͮͭ̎͋ͪ́͢͜͠

>God is real then
Infinite possibilities doesn’t mean an impossible thing can happen. You can infinitely pick a different number between 0 and 1, but you will never get 2. God may exist, but this is not an argument for it.

...

But thats wrong. The possibility of God existing is 50/50. He either does exist, or doesn't.

>But thats wrong. The *probability* of God existing is 50/50. He either does exist, or doesn't.
If you’re gonna bait at least do it using the right words.

ƃop

Òp?

Dòפ

{פ}{O}{D}
{p}{O}{G}
{X}{פ}{S}

W 'H '┴ 'Ɩ 'ɹ '∀ 'פ 'O '˥Z '∩ 'פ 'Ɩ 'Ǝ 'N '┴ 'q 'Y
Z '∩ 'פ 'Ɩ 'Ǝ 'N '┴ 'q 'YW 'H '┴ 'Ɩ 'ɹ '∀ 'פ 'O '˥

That's so retarded I hope you're not baiting because I feel better about myself right now.

O,Strokers-Z

3○×○E

I○×○I

Think about it. Don't post again until you have.