Assume the excluded middle

>>16987426
Will there be completion for the top jobs. It's either by vote or competition.

>>16987429
Sorry I didn't mean to type this nonsense in this thread I'll go back to /b/ now and join the lobotomites so I can talk to people who *get* me

Feeeeeaaag

>>16987423
there's nothing to debunk, either the son is correct or he isn't

>>16987694
Either the son is correct and it's 50/50
Or the son is incorrect and it's 50/50

It’s a matter of perspective. At a sufficient arbitrary diving line you could say everything is 50/50 or 25/75 or 10/100 etc. From the universe’s perspective everything is 1/1.

The issue isn’t math but your son being tricked by a language game.

>>16987423
debunk this? Where do you think this originated?

>>16987423
If you add up the 50/50 probabilities of the timelike curve of an event from A to B you get the final probability

>>16987423
Anything framed dualistically is 50/50, its just word game wankery

is op a faggot? that's not 50/50

>>16987808
/sci/ bait threads

>>16987844
>timelike curve
that's not a thing

>>16987423
either something happens or it doesn't, so all probabilities are 0% or 100% in real life

>>16988650
Yes it is, more precisely it's sum vectors for an object moving through spatial dimensions, since time is merely the relative comparison of objects moving with respect to eachother, if you now take this 3d vector, flatten out the space metric and inversely distort the time metric you will end up with a single line that can be used to describe the position of the object anywhere in space with a single value

>>16988592
damn nigga

File: 1763088619858.jpg (205.1 KB)

>>16987423

>>16987695
So its 25/75 actually

Probability is just a mathematical construction to codify uncertainty.

If you have two outcomes and can't infer anything else (or can expect uniform distribution) you treat it as a 50-50.

If you gain more information, you can adjust your constraints to better reflect the event you're trying to model.

Yes, most things can be framed as a binary of "it happens" or "it doesn't". It's literally the most basic model of probability outside of a constant outcome (which is only probability in the semantic sense)

>>16987423
he is assigning a probability of 0.5 to both the outcomes, which is a false premise to begin with. all he is saying is that the sample space consists of two outcomes. we do not know if those two outcomes are equally likely.

>>16992203
We do not know if those two outcomes are not equally likely. Looks like your fallacious, ill-informed, hasty, reckless, and terse reasoning is based on denying the exception.

>>16992346
sure, we do not. it very well could turn out to be 50/50, but the point is, we cannot just assign a 50/50 chance to both the outcomes without doing the math, under whatever starting assumptions (for example, in this picture's examples , we are assuming a discrete uniform distribution, under which, clearly we do not have a 50/50 chance).

Have you guys literally never studied mechanics or statistics? This thread is literal weaponised idiocy. Get out of my reality and never come back.

>>16992760
>My reality

>>16992760
>mechanics or statistics
that's 50:50

>>16987423
>he is not saying something has 50/50 chance of happeing
>he is saying something either happens or it doesnt

Number 1 this person is a moron. Number 2 the statistical analysis being applied is being applied to two different things here.

Something always has a 50/50 chance of happening in the context or it either happens or it doesnt but this is not what statistical analysis is for, the analysis is what is likelihood of it happening within a specific context and time frame. "Something will happen or it wont" is not meaningful or useful for anything. Will it happen within 100 instances and how often it will happen within those 100 instances, is meaningful and useful.

>>16992760
the people on this board have never understood statistics which is how I knew everyone here was psueds when I first came here. You cannot do science without being able to understandistatistics

Let's put it this way, playing the lottery isn't 50/50. The odds of a given state is defined by the number of possible causal pathways between the states. Like entropy, the number of paths to highly ordered configurations is tiny, therefore you see disordered configurations.

>>16987423
>cannot explain simple difference between number of outcomes and probability of those outcomes
top redditard

Let's put it another way: you theoretically have a 50% chance of being a fag but recent evidence suggests it's closer to 110%

>>16992882
>psueds
you clearly know what you are writing about

>>16987423
His son suffers from redditor parent syndrome. First step to fix it - stop using reddit, second step - stop using twitter

Depends what you apply it to desu. If you think about it deeply then yes. Take sports betting, there are so many variables and metrics that absolutely anything can happen and there is no guaranteed win. Favourites lose all the time, so much so only a small percentage of gamblers actually win money. Odds are more of an enticement than guarantee.

It's not probability he's talking about, it's a mistake. He's really describing possibility.

>>16994551
The probability of possibility is 50/50

File: 1780670237671160.jpg (183.8 KB)

>>16994552
This is the perfect red tape.

File: 71D1-YM-yqL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (87.1 KB)

>>16987423
Prove Aristotle was wrong about the law of the excluded middle, i.e. dialetheism:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dialetheism/

Lmao, leave it to a redditor to go online and ask strangers how to 'disprove' a stupid idea his kid had.
Btw, I have a book I want to sell you called 'what they don't teach you at Harvard business school.' It encompasses all human knowledge in one book, minus business.

There aren't only 2 possible outcomes, there are 13 when the invariant is the rank of the card. From that perspective he is arbitrarily putting the probability of drawing the Ace at 6.5/13, which is absurd. If there were only two mutually exclusive events, then randomness would actually dictate that the probability is 50/50 is the catch. But something can be not an ace and a king distinctly from not an ace and a queen therefore these events are additive. The Kolmogorov Axioms provide the rigorous foundations for probability and the main one is that probability is subadditive, meaning that it is additive but only over disjoint events. [math] A \cap B = \emptyset [/math]

>>16994645
Why would you use so many words to call him a homo

>>16987423
>Probability
>Prob. of prob.
>Prob of prob. of prob.

Not the same thing