2 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999Rajk999,
Your analogy is silly.
How do you know its the first diamond found. ALso, God did not find anything. He created. The probability that God created only one planet with life is almost zero.
Forget about God and life for just a few minutes, or for however long it takes you to show us your formula.
Forget about theology. Estimate how many grains of sand are in a square mile of the Sahara Desert. Multiply that by how many square miles the desert is, and figure in how deep the desert is for volume.
Take that number and somehow figure in your sample size of ONE located diamond. And show me the statistical formula for predicting what is the probability of locating another one and in how much space.
You're the one who said you knew the math for such a problem.
When you show me your math which you boasted of, then maybe we can apply it to the probobility of finding another planet with life on it among one billion galaxies.
This is statistics not theology at this point. Right ?
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by jaywillWhy in the world are you doing statistics on a diamond in the sand? The pertinent question is not "What is the probability that this diamond is alone amongst billions of grains of sand", the question is "Why is it here?"
I have a question. Say I am walking long in the Sahara desert amidst billions of grains of sand. I look down and find in the sand a diamond.
It is the first diamond that anyone has every found. How would you set up the math problem to predict the probability that other diamonds will be found in that desert?
Your statistical problem is basically flawed upon the presumption that one, and only one, diamond exists. Framing the calculation with that assumption most assuredly skews the formula outcome to the point that it is meaningless - you've created a problem based on a predetermined answer, and not the other way around.
Originally posted by Badwater====================================
Why in the world are you doing statistics on a diamond in the sand? The pertinent question is not "What is the probability that this diamond is alone amongst billions of grains of sand", the question is "Why is it here?"
Your statistical problem is basically flawed upon the presumption that one, and only one, diamond exists. Framing the calculation with ...[text shortened]... s - you've created a problem based on a predetermined answer, and not the other way around.
Why in the world are you doing statistics on a diamond in the sand? The pertinent question is not "What is the probability that this diamond is alone amongst billions of grains of sand", the question is "Why is it here?"
=========================================
That is another question. That is more a philosophical question.
My question is mathematical.
Right now my question is what statistical methodogy would Rakj999 employ to determine the probability of another diamond being found.
=======================================
Your statistical problem is basically flawed upon the presumption that one, and only one, diamond exists.
========================================
I didn't make that assumption. I said suppose I fouond one and want to predict the probability of finding another.
I in fact do not know if there are more or not. Having the probability determined would help. Since Rakj999 spoke about the ease of mathematically determining a problem like that, I ask him to demonstrate his methodology.
===================================
Framing the calculation with that assumption most assuredly skews the formula outcome to the point that it is meaningless - you've created a problem based on a predetermined answer, and not the other way around.
=====================================
No I haven't. I do not know what probability Rajk999 will arrive at by his method, whether 1 in a 100, 1 in 1000, or 1 in some other number.
I just want to see his method.
If Rakj999 does not have a method for determining probability then he should just say that he doesn't have it.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
There's an old expression in computers: GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out. That means your calculation is only as good as its input. The calculation you're trying to get with your diamond is only as significant as the input. It doesn't matter what Rajk999 comes up with; it's funny numbers because the setup for the problem - the input and the logic of it - is flawed.
Originally posted by jaywillWhere did I boast of being able to use statistics to prove such a thing?
Rajk999,
Forget about God and life for just a few minutes, or for however long it takes you to show us your formula.
Forget about theology. Estimate how many grains of sand are in a square mile of the Sahara Desert. Multiply that by how many square miles the desert is, and figure in how deep the desert is for volume.
Take that number and some ...[text shortened]... e on it among one billion galaxies.
This is statistics not theology at this point. Right ?
I wonder if you read these posts properly. You seem to enjoy writing. You obviously dont read well do you?
2 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999I apologies for mistaking someone else for you on this particular point.
Where did I boast of being able to use statistics to prove such a thing?
I wonder if you read these posts properly. You seem to enjoy writing. You obviously dont read well do you?
It was Badwater who wrote this:
==========================================
Mathematics: Now that we know the universe is composed of billions of galaxies, and we consider the probability that maybe one - ONE - planet like Earth could exists in that galaxy....well, you're just plain ignoring the odds that we here are actually unique. Odds are very good we are not. Do the math! It's very simple! I have no problem envisioning a shared universe. Now why that universe should have said creator stare intently on one tiny blue speck of a planet - and put his/her ENTIRE being into that blue speck, one of perhaps billions - well, that doesn't make a lick of sense to me. And don't feed me a surmised line of "Oh, God can be everywhere and do everything!!" Balls. Either you don't know or can't do that math.
===========================================
I consider this a taunt and a boast.
Now it is quite alright for Badwater to say that something makes no sense to him. No problem with that. But then Badwater goes on taunt that he can do a certain math problem and the poor other poster must not be able to do it.
He can't do the math apparently.
"Do the math!" Badwater says. But Badwater cannot demonstrate how the math is done.
Originally posted by jaywillBadwater will probably respond but I cant see any problem with what he wrote. If someone says 'do the math', it does not mean literally to go do the statistical calculation of the probability that a certain event will occur. It simply means to use your common sense, or 'figure it out'.
I apologies for mistaking someone else for you on this particular point.
It was Badwater who wrote this:
[b]==========================================
Mathematics: Now that we know the universe is composed of billions of galaxies, and we consider the probability that maybe one - ONE - planet like Earth could exists in that galaxy....well, you're j ...[text shortened]... he math!" Badwater says. But Badwater cannot demonstrate how the math is done.[/b]
Have you been to a planetarium? Or seen the photos taken by the Hubble telescope ? To me they are truly amazing. There are literally billions of galaxies. Quite likely all have inhabitable planets. Many will certainly have intelligent life forms. Some far more advanced that us. If you believe in God, you cannot possibly think that He created intelligent life on this one planet. Thats what he means by 'do that math'.
The problem is that you have convinced yourself that God is sitting out there waiting for the time when He can be part of mankind. Thats God's eternal purpose, according to you. Where you got that piece of garbage is a mystery to me. God therefore cannot be going around the universe creating other worlds. So your mind is closed. If you open it and see the universe it will destroy some of your childish doctrines.
Where do you think angels came from? Isnt it likely that they were the result of a previous creation somehwere in the universe?
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999The question was a mathematical one.
Badwater will probably respond but I cant see any problem with what he wrote. If someone says 'do the math', it does not mean literally to go do the statistical calculation of the probability that a certain event will occur. It simply means to use your common sense, or 'figure it out'.
Have you been to a planetarium? Or seen the photos taken by the Hubbl snt it likely that they were the result of a previous creation somehwere in the universe?
You couldn't set it up. Badwater hasn't been able to set it up but only complain that even to try is flawed.
It remains to be seen if it can be done. With the example I gave you probably need variables for:
Time - representing the amount of time you search
Sand - numbers of grains of sands represented in the volume of a cubic square mile.
Cubic Sq Miles - number of square cubic sq. miles.
C and perhaps some other constant or constants to set up the probability of finding another diamond in so much amount of time given that you spend each day searching.
P - equaling the probability
Maybe the problem cannot be done because we do not know enough.
At this point I'd like to see someone give it a good college try. Badwater seemed to be the one for whom it was no sweat.
This is a rigorous metholodgy which could be used to predict the pobability of there being another earth like planet in the universe. Gut feel is not the issue. Intuition is not the issue. Badwater, not me, made mathematics the issue.
2 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999===============================
Badwater will probably respond but I cant see any problem with what he wrote. If someone says 'do the math', it does not mean literally to go do the statistical calculation of the probability that a certain event will occur. It simply means to use your common sense, or 'figure it out'.
Have you been to a planetarium? Or seen the photos taken by the Hubbl snt it likely that they were the result of a previous creation somehwere in the universe?
Thats what he means by 'do that math'.
=====================================
Your attempts to rescue Badwater are comendable. But that is not what Badwater meant.
S/he was not talking about gut feel, philosophical musings, or intuition. Badwater meant the MATH of it, math which Badwater could do, and poor oher poster, must not be able to do.
So, where's Badwater's demonstration of how to do the Math of it?
Originally posted by jaywillLike I said before. Almost all of what you believe is not taught by either Christ or Paul but were doctrines developed by man subsequently. So you have basically departed from the true teachings of Christ. So I dont care to hear your opinion on Matt 25.
As for you Rajk999,
I am waiting on you to explain that Matthew 25:31-46 is the general final judgment of God upon all mankind - the last judgment.