EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

probability of coin toss

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - probability of coin toss

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:45 pm   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
On 2/1/2019 3:23 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32cna$mrl$7_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 3:03 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32bhq$mrl$6_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:50 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32b2i$mrl$5_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:30 PM,
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q3216a$mrl$3_at_dont-email.me:

And what IS your calculated probability of that outcome,
AlwaysWrong?


Fuck off and die, uncivil, retarded, Usenet troll
fucktard!


Referencing the original statement:

" So 100 tosses could result in 100 events with the same
outcome.

Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the
question when one is
examining a set or group of like events. "

So you have no clue about the binomial theorem and how to
use it with either Excel or WolframAlpha to get an answer,
do you? If that is the question, why not impress us with
your genius and give us the answer.

Show us your answer and I'll show you mine.



I was an Excel master decades ago, chump. I still am.
My
workbooks rock.

You are a trivial twerp, at best. And what gets your
gourd is
that I have pegged you correctly.

Oh, and my Wolfram|Alpha is the paid for version, so I
likely have
upped your petty ass there as well. And I also know how to
write the name correctly.

You are likely one of those jerk fucks whom emptied
their car ash
trays at the roadside.


So, what's the solution, Fake?


The very fact that I made the statement shows I know what I
am
talking about.

It shows nothing. Show the probability that 100 tosses of a fair
coin could result in 100 heads (or tails).

"Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the question when
one is
examining a set or group of like events. "

The very fact that you deliberately ignored that further
proves
that you are nothing more than a pathetic Usenet PUNK FUCK.


Ignored what? I am asking for the solution in your second
original sentence. It is easy if you know how to use either
Excel or WolframAlpha (WolframAlpha as written on their Web
page). If I tell you the probability, will you be able to find
it yourself?




The probability of even 30 consectutive heads (or tails) results
is 30,000,000 to 1

Go away, little boy.


That is not the solution to your original statement. Let me take
your hand and tell you how to come up with the correct answer.

Enter into WolframAlpha the phrase "probility of getting 100 heads
in 100 coin tosses" without the quotes.

In Excel put the following into any cell:
=BINOMDIST(100,100,0.5,FALSE)

The two results should agree. Tell me what you find and I will
tell you whether my result agrees with yours.


Wrong formula.

Show us the correct, actual probability formula, not some lame
Excel or Wolfram function.

Write out the actual probability math, child.

The goal is defining the formula to obtain the correct probability
of n number of same result tosses in a row. The number is so low
that considering 100 in a row is ludicrous and your math is likely
orders of magnitude off the mark.

In other words, I think you have probelmes seeing, much less
defining big picture elements of nature. You half assed it, boy.


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:45 pm   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
That is not the solution to your original statement. Let me take
your hand and tell you how to come up with the correct answer.


Fuck off and die, putz!


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:45 pm   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q32di9$mrl$8_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
You are a trivial twerp, at best. And what gets your gourd is
that I have pegged you correctly.

I have no goat.


You're a drunken old man. You can't even read.

John S
Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:45 pm   



On 2/1/2019 3:23 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32cna$mrl$7_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 3:03 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32bhq$mrl$6_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:50 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32b2i$mrl$5_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:30 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q3216a$mrl$3_at_dont-email.me:

And what IS your calculated probability of that outcome,
AlwaysWrong?


Fuck off and die, uncivil, retarded, Usenet troll
fucktard!


Referencing the original statement:

" So 100 tosses could result in 100 events with the same
outcome.

Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the question
when one is
examining a set or group of like events. "

So you have no clue about the binomial theorem and how to use
it with either Excel or WolframAlpha to get an answer, do you?
If that is the question, why not impress us with your genius
and give us the answer.

Show us your answer and I'll show you mine.



I was an Excel master decades ago, chump. I still am. My
workbooks rock.

You are a trivial twerp, at best. And what gets your gourd
is
that I have pegged you correctly.

Oh, and my Wolfram|Alpha is the paid for version, so I
likely have
upped your petty ass there as well. And I also know how to
write the name correctly.

You are likely one of those jerk fucks whom emptied their
car ash
trays at the roadside.


So, what's the solution, Fake?


The very fact that I made the statement shows I know what I am
talking about.

It shows nothing. Show the probability that 100 tosses of a fair
coin could result in 100 heads (or tails).

"Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the question when one
is
examining a set or group of like events. "

The very fact that you deliberately ignored that further
proves
that you are nothing more than a pathetic Usenet PUNK FUCK.


Ignored what? I am asking for the solution in your second original
sentence. It is easy if you know how to use either Excel or
WolframAlpha (WolframAlpha as written on their Web page). If I
tell you the probability, will you be able to find it yourself?




The probability of even 30 consectutive heads (or tails) results is
30,000,000 to 1

Go away, little boy.

Your answer is not correct. For 30 heads in 30 tosses the probability is
1 in 1 billion.

For 30 heads in 100 tosses the probability is 1 in 43,158.

Go away little girl.


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:45 pm   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32ffk$mrl$11_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
On 2/1/2019 3:23 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32cna$mrl$7_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 3:03 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32bhq$mrl$6_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:50 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32b2i$mrl$5_at_dont-email.me:

On 2/1/2019 2:30 PM,
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q3216a$mrl$3_at_dont-email.me:

And what IS your calculated probability of that outcome,
AlwaysWrong?


Fuck off and die, uncivil, retarded, Usenet troll
fucktard!


Referencing the original statement:

" So 100 tosses could result in 100 events with the same
outcome.

Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the
question when one is
examining a set or group of like events. "

So you have no clue about the binomial theorem and how to
use it with either Excel or WolframAlpha to get an answer,
do you? If that is the question, why not impress us with
your genius and give us the answer.

Show us your answer and I'll show you mine.



I was an Excel master decades ago, chump. I still am.
My
workbooks rock.

You are a trivial twerp, at best. And what gets your
gourd is
that I have pegged you correctly.

Oh, and my Wolfram|Alpha is the paid for version, so I
likely have
upped your petty ass there as well. And I also know how to
write the name correctly.

You are likely one of those jerk fucks whom emptied
their car ash
trays at the roadside.


So, what's the solution, Fake?


The very fact that I made the statement shows I know what I
am
talking about.

It shows nothing. Show the probability that 100 tosses of a fair
coin could result in 100 heads (or tails).

"Now, the PROBABILITY of that happening is the question when
one is
examining a set or group of like events. "

The very fact that you deliberately ignored that further
proves
that you are nothing more than a pathetic Usenet PUNK FUCK.


Ignored what? I am asking for the solution in your second
original sentence. It is easy if you know how to use either
Excel or WolframAlpha (WolframAlpha as written on their Web
page). If I tell you the probability, will you be able to find
it yourself?




The probability of even 30 consectutive heads (or tails) results
is 30,000,000 to 1

Go away, little boy.

Your answer is not correct.


You are too goddamned stupid to make that claim.

Quote:
For 30 heads in 30 tosses the
probability is 1 in 1 billion.


Nope.
Quote:

For 30 heads in 100 tosses the probability is 1 in 43,158.


You are absolutely fucked in the head and this proves it.

30 CONSECUTIVE HEADS TOSSES, you stupid fuck!

The number is the same even within 1000 tosses, you fucking idiot!
Proof that you do not even have a clue about it.

If one cannot even get 30 consecutive like result tosses, one will
certainly not be able to achieve 100 with the same probability
number.

Thirty consective like result tosses in 30 tries will have the
exact same odds as getting 30 like result tosses IN A ROW within a
100 or 1000 toss sequence. The odds are so high that even the
probability number do not change. You could use 10000 tosses.

Quote:

Go away little girl.


John S
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:45 am   



On 2/1/2019 4:07 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32di9$mrl$8_at_dont-email.me:

Oh, and my Wolfram|Alpha is the paid for version, so I likely
have
upped your petty ass there as well. And I also know how to write
the name correctly.

No, you haven't upped me. The proper writing of the name I use is
on the banner of their Web page.


Dumbshit. The 'upped you' part was a reference to the fact that I
BOUGHT the software, and you likely perform shithead google searches.

And Wolfram is the entity which DOES use the bar, even on their site.


No, I purchased Wolfram. No, they do not use the bar on their site.

All you want to do is argue and insult. I was trying to help you but you
are clearly beyond help. You obviously have no math or engineering
abilities. You have been lying and faking it all along. I'm not
insulting you, I'm describing you. Which is why you are known here as
AlwaysWrong. I wash my hands of you (literally).


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 am   



On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:03:19 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

Quote:
krw_at_notreal.com wrote in news:5fh75etplhhaef6kuag3afhm9ftpbj7tia@
4ax.com:

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 02:33:34 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

Pomegranate Bastard <pommyb_at_aol.com> wrote in
news:gjr35e1omch40bcah237v5q61u85p7768q_at_4ax.com:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:40:13 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in
news:1kr45epo9qh3basvfgo4v501utvuo70nvh@
4ax.com:

No, DimBulb, your mother brought out the worst of you. YOU!

YOU? YOU are a piece of shit.

Your mother? YOUR MOTHER should be put in prison, cheap whore
that
it is. Your cheap whore mother should be put in prison for
failing to pull the flush handle, the moment the severly ass
fucked street slut shat you.

There's a strong correlation between a person's intelligence and
the quality of their jokes. Never truer in this case. You are an
imbecile.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus



I perform mechanical and electrical engineering tasks.

You are neither.

I am performing both services.


....and this isn't the first time you've admitted that you are neither,
AlwaysWrong.

>Sorry Krong Rong Wanker.

Wow! I'll bet that was hard for you to come up with.

Quote:
I am
orders of magnitude more productive on my computer than you are on
yours. You cannot even behave like an adult.


No, you are AlwaysWrong.

Quote:
Sad too, since IIRC you were once an "IBM Fellow". To stoop to
your level, you likely cleaned their toilets. You certainly do not
have the brains for anything else.


You are _always_ wrong, AlwaysWrong. It's amazing how anyone can be
wrong so often.

> I'll bet that my CAD workstation puts yours to shame.

Why would I even have a "CAD workstation"? Only an idiot brags about
a stupid computer, these days. What's the matter, AlwaysWrong.
Feeling a little small? ...down there?

Quote:
I would also bet on my doing real engineering work on it. Whereas
all you do with yours is ac like an uncivil asswipe in Usenet.


Yet you are not.

Quote:
I would also bet that my machine has more legit, paid for software
on it. Whereas you likely barely get email on yours while you spend
time hunting up heart health behaviors and trolling real adults on
Usenet.


You really are an idiot, AlwaysWrong.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32l6d$mrl$13_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
But this still not address your original stupid statement. That
is, the probability that you can observe 100 heads in 100 tosses.
Haven't figured that one out yet, eh genius?


No, dumbfuck. My statement was that 100 like tosses are possible,
and they are. The I stated that IT COMES DOWN TO the probability of
that happening. And that probability is a very small number.

You are the one that has since made all the stupid statements.

Grow the fuck up, putz.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32l6d$mrl$13_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
However, the probability of 30 consecutive heads in 1000 tosses is
actually about 2.21e6 (2,210,000 since you don't understand
exponential notation).


Not true.

I was doing scientific notation before you even knew what it was,
boy. I am from the slide rule era, fuckhead.

AND you are STILL wrong on the probability. You FAIL to see any
aspect of the probability or lack thereof at all. So you certainly
got the formulation wrong to achieve the answer.

You likely cannot even get the probability of a single consecutive
same result event within any set of total toss numbers.

You are lost, dipshit. And your cracks about me and math makes
you nothing more than yet another retarded Usenet PUTZ! You're a
fucking joke. AND you don't know shit about probability, because
you do not even have a picture of the events you attempt to reflect
upon.

You deserve no credence or quarter. Fuck you, John S.

Robert Baer
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
krw_at_notreal.com wrote in news:5fh75etplhhaef6kuag3afhm9ftpbj7tia@
4ax.com:

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 02:33:34 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

Pomegranate Bastard <pommyb_at_aol.com> wrote in
news:gjr35e1omch40bcah237v5q61u85p7768q_at_4ax.com:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:40:13 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in
news:1kr45epo9qh3basvfgo4v501utvuo70nvh@
4ax.com:

No, DimBulb, your mother brought out the worst of you. YOU!

YOU? YOU are a piece of shit.

Your mother? YOUR MOTHER should be put in prison, cheap whore
that
it is. Your cheap whore mother should be put in prison for
failing to pull the flush handle, the moment the severly ass
fucked street slut shat you.

There's a strong correlation between a person's intelligence and
the quality of their jokes. Never truer in this case. You are an
imbecile.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus



I perform mechanical and electrical engineering tasks.

You are neither.

I am performing both services. Sorry Krong Rong Wanker. I am
orders of magnitude more productive on my computer than you are on
yours. You cannot even behave like an adult.

Sad too, since IIRC you were once an "IBM Fellow". To stoop to
your level, you likely cleaned their toilets. You certainly do not
have the brains for anything else.

I'll bet that my CAD workstation puts yours to shame.

I would also bet on my doing real engineering work on it. Whereas
all you do with yours is ac like an uncivil asswipe in Usenet.

I would also bet that my machine has more legit, paid for software
on it. Whereas you likely barely get email on yours while you spend
time hunting up heart health behaviors and trolling real adults on
Usenet.

Did anyone mention that a perfectly balanced coin CAN NOT produce a
perfect 50/50 result?
As a wild guess,the result is like 49.99999/49.99999/0.00001.
I will let the student determine what that third choice is; for an
advanced credit, derive an equation to approximately predict the 3rd
probability.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in
news:q32ilc$mrl$12_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
You obviously have no math or engineering
abilities.


Fuck you, and the whore you were shat out of, asswipe.

I was studying the CRC handbook at 12 years old. Way back in '72.
Fuck you.

> You have been lying and faking it all along.

Your mother lied about the orfice you were birthed from.


Quote:
I'm not
insulting you,


You are too goddamned stupid to insult me. Your words are what
are lies and fake horseshit.

> I'm describing you.

No. You are merely jacking off at the mouth, just like the KRW
retard does. He has no facts with which to debate either.

Quote:
Which is why you are known here
as AlwaysWrong.


No. I am not, you retarded, dumb motherfucker. AMONG YOUR
RETARDED USENET FUCKTARD FRIENDS. You all jack off at the mouth
with your petty, pussified names.


> I wash my hands of you (literally).

Go jump off a bridge after you kill every member of your family
and remove your pathetic genes from the human gene pool.

Fuck Off And Die, John S.

I do not give a fuck about your false claim that you were 'trying
to help'. You are as full of shit as the other jackass is.

Go away, little sub-human, Usenet trolling fucktard.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q32ilc$mrl$12_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
but you
are clearly beyond help.


Yet another one of you Usenet holier than thou twerp fuck mindsets in
action. You are a Twilight Zone jackass. YOU are the one beyond help.

AND you got the probability thing wrong as well.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:45 am   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q32ilc$mrl$12_at_dont-email.me:

> All you want to do is argue and insult. I was trying to help you

Bullshit. You have spent years insulting me and participating in the
insult regimen of the trolls. You cannot for even a second expect me
to afford you any credence in your posts as if they were geniune and
civil in nature. You are on the automatically skeptical of your
motives list, dig?

I do not need your 'help' and that particularly not in the manner in
which you delivered it.


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:45 am   



Robert Baer <robertbaer_at_localnet.com> wrote in
news:LDa5E.189859$Fj3.159053_at_fx06.iad:

Quote:
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:
krw_at_notreal.com wrote in news:5fh75etplhhaef6kuag3afhm9ftpbj7tia@
4ax.com:

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 02:33:34 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

Pomegranate Bastard <pommyb_at_aol.com> wrote in
news:gjr35e1omch40bcah237v5q61u85p7768q_at_4ax.com:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:40:13 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in
news:1kr45epo9qh3basvfgo4v501utvuo70nvh@
4ax.com:

No, DimBulb, your mother brought out the worst of you. YOU!

YOU? YOU are a piece of shit.

Your mother? YOUR MOTHER should be put in prison, cheap
whore that
it is. Your cheap whore mother should be put in prison for
failing to pull the flush handle, the moment the severly ass
fucked street slut shat you.

There's a strong correlation between a person's intelligence
and the quality of their jokes. Never truer in this case. You
are an imbecile.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus



I perform mechanical and electrical engineering tasks.

You are neither.

I am performing both services. Sorry Krong Rong Wanker. I am
orders of magnitude more productive on my computer than you are
on yours. You cannot even behave like an adult.

Sad too, since IIRC you were once an "IBM Fellow". To stoop
to
your level, you likely cleaned their toilets. You certainly do
not have the brains for anything else.

I'll bet that my CAD workstation puts yours to shame.

I would also bet on my doing real engineering work on it.
Whereas
all you do with yours is ac like an uncivil asswipe in Usenet.

I would also bet that my machine has more legit, paid for
software
on it. Whereas you likely barely get email on yours while you
spend time hunting up heart health behaviors and trolling real
adults on Usenet.

Did anyone mention that a perfectly balanced coin CAN NOT
produce a
perfect 50/50 result?


You really are lost on this balance thing. Coin tosses are
chaotic, so 'balance', and edge condition... NONE of that matters.

WAKE UP!

Quote:
As a wild guess,the result is like 49.99999/49.99999/0.00001.
I will let the student determine what that third choice is; for
an
advanced credit, derive an equation to approximately predict the
3rd probability.


Dude! The 'balance' of the coin matters NOT!

It is like a billiard break. Even though ALL of the balls are
placed in the EXACT same locations each time (far more exact than
your balanced coin delusion), the rack still breaks up differently
each (and every) time.

Again... W A K E U P !!!


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:45 am   



krw_at_notreal.com wrote in news:be6a5ep2maksppgqit4bjmovq4ibk8qn02@
4ax.com:

Quote:
I'll bet that my CAD workstation puts yours to shame.

Why would I even have a "CAD workstation"?


Yeah... all you need is a cheap chromebook to troll Usenet with.

Whereas I actually perform work on my machines.

Quote:
Only an idiot brags about
a stupid computer,


Only an idiot unable to reply correctly cries about bragging.
And you are the only 'stupid computer' on this bus, child.


Quote:
these days. What's the matter, AlwaysWrong.
Feeling a little small? ...down there?


Only an idiot thinks all other men are as concerned with their
penis as they are.

Sorry, punk. You couldn't be farther off the mark.

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - probability of coin toss

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map