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

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

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

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:45 am

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in

news:be6a5ep2maksppgqit4bjmovq4ibk8qn02_at_4ax.com:

...and this isn't the first time you've admitted that you are

neither, AlwaysWrong.

neither, AlwaysWrong.

I made no such statement.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:45 am

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:03:19 +0000 (UTC),

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.

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.

All this juvenile "My CAD workstation is better than yours" guff is

exactly what you'd expect from somebody with a mental age of 12.

Your thin skin and childish petulant outbursts put you firmly in the

same category that other lying infantile berk, your hero Donald J

Chump.

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.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:45 pm

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:45 pm

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

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.

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

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q348gj$mrl$16_at_dont-

email.me:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Again you fail to analyze the proper set of events much less

probabilities within same.

The probability for even a single consecutive like toss is:

p=1-(1-1/2^x)^n-x+1.

So you missed that aspect.

So for a single set... one toss followed by another, the simple

odds are 1 in 4 that the second toss will match the first. The

formula gets slightly more complicated when subsequent tosses are

factored in and expected consecutive like results get achieved.

Hard to put it in here.

n=x-1+ln(1-p)/ln(1-1/2^x)

With a hundred flips, you might start seeing 6 or 7 in a row.

10 out of ten or a hundred is ludicrous

100 out of 100 is astronomically ludicrous.

To get 10 consec, like tosses...

10 out of ten AND

10 out of 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc. all have the same probability as

no previous toss weighs on any subsequent toss. So the odds of

getting ten in a row are so high that the set size you try to

achieve that in is no different than doing it ten times per set.

Hitting that ten in a row does not matter if you tried to get there

within 10 tosses or a thousand. The odds of achieving a THIAR (Ten

Heads In A Row) within a 1000 toss set is the same as doing 100 ten

sets and the odds are the same there as well. Replace heads with

tails at will and nothing changes and that regardless of some dope's

precious "coin balance" numbers.

You may start to get the picture, if you can get this simple

idiom.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 06:31:15 +0000 (UTC),

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32l6d$mrl$13_at_dont-email.me:

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.

news:q32l6d$mrl$13_at_dont-email.me:

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.

But you can't come up with the number.

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

No, AlwaysWrong, you're the master of stupid.

> Grow the fuck up, putz.

You really should try it, Nymbecile.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 08:12:54 -0600, John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n – k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 – p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n – k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 – p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

That's the trivial case of the above: for the simple case of a fair

coin and no funny business: 1/2^100

The probability that the 100 tosses are all the same, it's 1/2^99 (the

first result doesn't matter).

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 22:19:23 -0800, Robert Baer

<robertbaer_at_localnet.com> wrote:

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?

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.

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.

Well, the coin could tunnel through the earth, never to be seen again.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 06:58:15 +0000 (UTC),

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in news:be6a5ep2maksppgqit4bjmovq4ibk8qn02@

4ax.com:

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.

4ax.com:

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.

No one "needs" any more if one were to "troll <the> Usenet",

AlwaysWrong but any moron could tell that I'm not using a chromebook.

Since you can't...

Whereas I actually perform work on my machines.

I can see that you're as hard as you can, here, AlwaysWrong.

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.

a stupid computer,

Only an idiot unable to reply correctly cries about bragging.

And you are the only 'stupid computer' on this bus, child.

You really are a fool, AlwaysWrong.

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.

....and you trip over your own tongue. Again.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:45 pm

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 06:53:35 +0000 (UTC),

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

krw_at_notreal.com wrote in

news:be6a5ep2maksppgqit4bjmovq4ibk8qn02_at_4ax.com:

...and this isn't the first time you've admitted that you are

neither, AlwaysWrong.

I made no such statement.

news:be6a5ep2maksppgqit4bjmovq4ibk8qn02_at_4ax.com:

...and this isn't the first time you've admitted that you are

neither, AlwaysWrong.

I made no such statement.

Now you lie, AlwaysWrong. _Every_ time you're pinned down you evade

the issue with weasel words (not that we don't expect anything more

from you).

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 6:45 pm

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 16:31:17 +0000 (UTC),

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q348gj$mrl$16_at_dont-

email.me:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Again you fail to analyze the proper set of events much less

probabilities within same.

The probability for even a single consecutive like toss is:

p=1-(1-1/2^x)^n-x+1.

So you missed that aspect.

So for a single set... one toss followed by another, the simple

odds are 1 in 4 that the second toss will match the first.

email.me:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Again you fail to analyze the proper set of events much less

probabilities within same.

The probability for even a single consecutive like toss is:

p=1-(1-1/2^x)^n-x+1.

So you missed that aspect.

So for a single set... one toss followed by another, the simple

odds are 1 in 4 that the second toss will match the first.

AlwaysWrong. A normal person could be wrong as often as you are, if

they tried!

The

formula gets slightly more complicated when subsequent tosses are

factored in and expected consecutive like results get achieved.

Hard to put it in here.

formula gets slightly more complicated when subsequent tosses are

factored in and expected consecutive like results get achieved.

Hard to put it in here.

No, it doesn't.

n=x-1+ln(1-p)/ln(1-1/2^x)

AlwaysWrong.

With a hundred flips, you might start seeing 6 or 7 in a row.

10 out of ten or a hundred is ludicrous

100 out of 100 is astronomically ludicrous.

To get 10 consec, like tosses...

10 out of ten AND

10 out of 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc. all have the same probability as

no previous toss weighs on any subsequent toss. So the odds of

getting ten in a row are so high that the set size you try to

achieve that in is no different than doing it ten times per set.

Hitting that ten in a row does not matter if you tried to get there

within 10 tosses or a thousand. The odds of achieving a THIAR (Ten

Heads In A Row) within a 1000 toss set is the same as doing 100 ten

sets and the odds are the same there as well. Replace heads with

tails at will and nothing changes and that regardless of some dope's

precious "coin balance" numbers.

You may start to get the picture, if you can get this simple

idiom.

10 out of ten or a hundred is ludicrous

100 out of 100 is astronomically ludicrous.

To get 10 consec, like tosses...

10 out of ten AND

10 out of 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc. all have the same probability as

no previous toss weighs on any subsequent toss. So the odds of

getting ten in a row are so high that the set size you try to

achieve that in is no different than doing it ten times per set.

Hitting that ten in a row does not matter if you tried to get there

within 10 tosses or a thousand. The odds of achieving a THIAR (Ten

Heads In A Row) within a 1000 toss set is the same as doing 100 ten

sets and the odds are the same there as well. Replace heads with

tails at will and nothing changes and that regardless of some dope's

precious "coin balance" numbers.

You may start to get the picture, if you can get this simple

idiom.

In other words, you haven't a clue what you're talking about. We

expect that from you, AlwaysWrong.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:45 pm

On 2/2/2019 10:06 AM, krw_at_notreal.com wrote:

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 22:19:23 -0800, Robert Baer

robertbaer_at_localnet.com> wrote:

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?

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.

Well, the coin could tunnel through the earth, never to be seen again.

robertbaer_at_localnet.com> wrote:

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?

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.

Well, the coin could tunnel through the earth, never to be seen again.

A perfectly balanced FAIR coin will have no edge on which to balance. So

goes the three possibilities, however remote.

Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:45 pm

On 2/2/2019 10:11 AM, krw_at_notreal.com wrote:

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 08:12:54 -0600, John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

That's the trivial case of the above: for the simple case of a fair

coin and no funny business: 1/2^100

The probability that the 100 tosses are all the same, it's 1/2^99 (the

first result doesn't matter).

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n â€“ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 â€“ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

That's the trivial case of the above: for the simple case of a fair

coin and no funny business: 1/2^100

The probability that the 100 tosses are all the same, it's 1/2^99 (the

first result doesn't matter).

Close enough! But he wanted the formula. I gave it and he will have no

clue how to use it.

Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:45 am

On 2/2/2019 10:31 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q348gj$mrl$16_at_dont-

email.me:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n Ã¢â‚¬â€œ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Again you fail to analyze the proper set of events much less

probabilities within same.

The probability for even a single consecutive like toss is:

p=1-(1-1/2^x)^n-x+1.

So you missed that aspect.

So for a single set... one toss followed by another, the simple

odds are 1 in 4 that the second toss will match the first. The

formula gets slightly more complicated when subsequent tosses are

factored in and expected consecutive like results get achieved.

Hard to put it in here.

n=x-1+ln(1-p)/ln(1-1/2^x)

With a hundred flips, you might start seeing 6 or 7 in a row.

10 out of ten or a hundred is ludicrous

100 out of 100 is astronomically ludicrous.

To get 10 consec, like tosses...

10 out of ten AND

10 out of 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc. all have the same probability as

no previous toss weighs on any subsequent toss. So the odds of

getting ten in a row are so high that the set size you try to

achieve that in is no different than doing it ten times per set.

Hitting that ten in a row does not matter if you tried to get there

within 10 tosses or a thousand. The odds of achieving a THIAR (Ten

Heads In A Row) within a 1000 toss set is the same as doing 100 ten

sets and the odds are the same there as well. Replace heads with

tails at will and nothing changes and that regardless of some dope's

precious "coin balance" numbers.

You may start to get the picture, if you can get this simple

idiom.

email.me:

On 2/1/2019 4:14 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org

wrote:

John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in

news:q32e0a$mrl$9_at_dont-email.me:

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.

Okay. Here it is...

Formula:

P(k,n)=(p^k)*q^(n-k)

Where:

n = number of trials

k = number of successes

n Ã¢â‚¬â€œ k = number of failures

p = probability of success in one trial

q = 1 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ p = probability of failure in one trial

Now show the probability of achieving 100 heads in 100 tosses.

Again you fail to analyze the proper set of events much less

probabilities within same.

The probability for even a single consecutive like toss is:

p=1-(1-1/2^x)^n-x+1.

So you missed that aspect.

So for a single set... one toss followed by another, the simple

odds are 1 in 4 that the second toss will match the first. The

formula gets slightly more complicated when subsequent tosses are

factored in and expected consecutive like results get achieved.

Hard to put it in here.

n=x-1+ln(1-p)/ln(1-1/2^x)

With a hundred flips, you might start seeing 6 or 7 in a row.

10 out of ten or a hundred is ludicrous

100 out of 100 is astronomically ludicrous.

To get 10 consec, like tosses...

10 out of ten AND

10 out of 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc. all have the same probability as

no previous toss weighs on any subsequent toss. So the odds of

getting ten in a row are so high that the set size you try to

achieve that in is no different than doing it ten times per set.

Hitting that ten in a row does not matter if you tried to get there

within 10 tosses or a thousand. The odds of achieving a THIAR (Ten

Heads In A Row) within a 1000 toss set is the same as doing 100 ten

sets and the odds are the same there as well. Replace heads with

tails at will and nothing changes and that regardless of some dope's

precious "coin balance" numbers.

You may start to get the picture, if you can get this simple

idiom.

Hey, DecadentAlwaysWrong - (Decadent is a great definition of you)

Your original assertion of 100 heads/tails out of 100 tosses of a fair

coin probability is 7.8886090522101E-31. That is, nearly infinitesimal.

probability of 10 consecutive heads/tails in 20 tosses: 3/512 (do you

know how to divide? it is .005859)

probability of 10 consecutive heads/tails in 30 tosses: 44991/4191304

(about .01073)

Already your second assertion is wrong, DecadentAlwaysWrong.

Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:34 am

On 2019-02-02, John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote:

On 2/2/2019 10:06 AM, krw_at_notreal.com wrote:

A perfectly balanced FAIR coin will have no edge on which to balance. So

goes the three possibilities, however remote.

A perfectly balanced FAIR coin will have no edge on which to balance. So

goes the three possibilities, however remote.

There's always a metastable state between two logic states.

In this case the width of the metastable state depends on the

hardness and roughness of the floor and the sharpness of the coin edge.

--

When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

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