View Full Version : Math ****** *******s
SicEmBaylor
8/19/2006, 04:56 PM
I've said this before, but I suck at math.
My question pertains to the lottery. Why wouldn't it be possible to enter all of the lottery numbers (not the entire sequence just the individual numbers) into some sort of system that analyzes the number of time each number was drawn, the numbers not drawn, and then gives you the numbers most likely to be drawn in the next lotto.
OUHOMER
8/19/2006, 05:00 PM
each number has the same odds of coming up each time, regardless if they have come lately or not/
proud gonzo
8/19/2006, 05:02 PM
if you're flipping a coin, each flip there is a 50% chance it'll be heads. so with one way of looking at it then there's a 1/4 chance you'll get heads twice in a row. 1/8 of three in a row, 1/16 for four in a row.
but the other way of looking at it is that since each individual flip is random completely separate from any previous or following flip, you won't have a 1/32 chance of getting heads that fifth time in a row, it'll be 1/2 just like every other flip.
so i say there's no way to predict something that's random.
fadada1
8/19/2006, 05:02 PM
if you apply "aggie logic" to the lottery, you never win and you wake up with your head stapled to a sheep.
SicEmBaylor
8/19/2006, 05:05 PM
Thus my attempt at becoming instantly rich has been foiled by my old nemesis...math.
GottaHavePride
8/19/2006, 05:08 PM
PG got it: previous occurences have no bearing on future ocurences. So previous lottery drawings have no bearing on what numbers are likely to come up in one particular drawing. Now, if numbers that are drawn were removed from the pool, then you'd have a whole different situation, not to mention the reason that card-counters worked Vegas over for a lot of money at the blackjack tables before they caught on and banned them.
GottaHavePride
8/19/2006, 05:08 PM
if you apply "aggie logic" to the lottery, you never win and you wake up with your head stapled to a sheep.
I thought that WAS winning the aggie lottery...
Frozen Sooner
8/19/2006, 05:12 PM
if you're flipping a coin, each flip there is a 50% chance it'll be heads. so with one way of looking at it then there's a 1/4 chance you'll get heads twice in a row. 1/8 of three in a row, 1/16 for four in a row.
but the other way of looking at it is that since each individual flip is random completely separate from any previous or following flip, you won't have a 1/32 chance of getting heads that fifth time in a row, it'll be 1/2 just like every other flip.
so i say there's no way to predict something that's random.
My God that's hot.
;)
Correct, too.
SicEm, you're operating on the fallacy of prior results. To simplify what PG said-the probability of five coin flips all coming up tails is 1/32. The probability of the fifth coin flip coming up tails is 1/2. If the four prior coin flips are given as tails, then the chance of five in a row is 1/2, because only the fifth is indeterminate.
The fallacy of prior results is also used pretty frequently as an argument for intelligent design.
OUHOMER
8/19/2006, 05:16 PM
Isnt that what i said????
fadada1
8/19/2006, 05:19 PM
SicEm, you're operating on the fallacy of prior results.
again, "aggie logic" can apply here. aggies think they can actual beat us at football - because they've lost soooooo much. while there is an occasional "tail" - them winning - heads are predominant. they seem to think every year, "we've just GOT to win this time. so i'll bet on us."
Frozen Sooner
8/19/2006, 05:20 PM
Isnt that what i said????
Yes, it is.
GottaHavePride
8/19/2006, 05:37 PM
Isnt that what i said????
Sorry, yes. Homer got it right too.
proud gonzo
8/19/2006, 05:40 PM
Isnt that what i said????
you didnt' make the right hand gesture.
yermom
8/19/2006, 05:42 PM
you are leaving out the cut that the lottery commission takes too
this comes into effect because the number of nubmers previously drawn are pretty astronomically small compared to the total number of possibilities
you'd basically have to buy every possible number, and you'd win, but it would be less than what you spent
OUinFLA
8/19/2006, 07:23 PM
and just in case you are thinking there are minute size discrepancies in the balls, which could actually cause a ball to fly up into the tube easier than another, you are possibly correct. So, down here in Fla, they use 6 sets of balls, and they completely change balls on a irregular basis.
After your state has a few years of experience in the numbers drawn, you will see all kinds of guides (usually sold for a price) which will link the most frequent number combinations. People buy them on the falicious thought that previous combinations have higher success rates in the future.
Of course, then...................the State ups and changes all the balls.
Bastards.
slickdawg
8/19/2006, 08:40 PM
if you're flipping a coin, each flip there is a 50% chance it'll be heads. so with one way of looking at it then there's a 1/4 chance you'll get heads twice in a row. 1/8 of three in a row, 1/16 for four in a row.
but the other way of looking at it is that since each individual flip is random completely separate from any previous or following flip, you won't have a 1/32 chance of getting heads that fifth time in a row, it'll be 1/2 just like every other flip.
so i say there's no way to predict something that's random.
And you would be 100% correct.
There is no way to predict random variables. We know they will be
between 0 and 50 (or 60) and that's it. There is no pattern, or reduction
or increase in the odds of any number being picked each week.
Vaevictis
8/19/2006, 11:21 PM
There is no way to predict random variables. We know they will be between 0 and 50 (or 60) and that's it. There is no pattern, or reduction
or increase in the odds of any number being picked each week.
You can predict random variables. After all, that is what you are doing in the lottery -- you are predicting that the numbers will come up in a certain combination, and if your prediction was correct, you win.
It's just that the probability of getting it right in the case of the lottery is very small. :) In other games, it's not so small.
you'd basically have to buy every possible number, and you'd win, but it would be less than what you spent
This could work, if nobody won for a long time and the payout was more than the total number of possible combinations.
Statistically the best way to play the lottery is to buy one ticket each time. Your odds of winning go from zero to whatever, whereas any further increase in your chances by buying any more tickets is neglible.
Vaevictis
8/20/2006, 08:55 PM
This could work, if nobody won for a long time and the payout was more than the total number of possible combinations.
Actually, I once saw a special about an Australian firm that did this. They ran the numbers, raised the funds, and waited until the payout was high enough to justify the risk. Then they bought all the numbers they could. They ended up winning and coming out ahead.
The key is to run the numbers, and calculate what the probability of your getting a certain amount of money out of it is. Once you get the right combination of risk to reward, you can pull the trigger.
The real risk is that you won't develop a logitics system capable of successfully purchasing all/enough of the number combinations in the 2-3 days available to purchase tickets.
Statistically the best way to play the lottery is to buy one ticket each time. Your odds of winning go from zero to whatever, whereas any further increase in your chances by buying any more tickets is neglible.
It depends on your metric. If you're talking about what increases your odds of winning most, then yes. IMO, the best way is to purchase tickets only when the expected value of a ticket equals or exceeds the cost to purchase. This is a rare occurance, but it maximizes your probability of coming out ahead.
Soonrboy
8/20/2006, 09:23 PM
so, if I pick six numbers, then the 1,2,3,4,5,6 pick has as much chance to win as anything else?
Vaevictis
8/20/2006, 09:31 PM
so, if I pick six numbers, then the 1,2,3,4,5,6 pick has as much chance to win as anything else?
Yep.
(However, it may be that that particular sequence is attractive to more people than another sequence -- which, if that is so, would reduce your payout should you win.)
proud gonzo
8/20/2006, 09:40 PM
This could work, if nobody won for a long time and the payout was more than the total number of possible combinations.
Statistically the best way to play the lottery is to buy one ticket each time. Your odds of winning go from zero to whatever, whereas any further increase in your chances by buying any more tickets is neglible.
...according to the powerball people you have a 1/146,107,962 chance of winning.
Thus my attempt at becoming instantly rich has been foiled by my old nemesis...math.
you are not the first nor will you be the last political mind to be foiled by math. In fact, its quite a common occurrence.
sadly.
sanantoniosooner
8/20/2006, 10:48 PM
anyone who knows anything about math isn't concerned with the lottery.
william_brasky
8/21/2006, 01:25 AM
anyone who knows anything about math isn't concerned with the lottery.
...
...according to the powerball people you have a 1/146,107,962 chance of winning.
But that's still substantially more than zero, which are your odds of winning if you don't buy a ticket at all. The tiny bit your odds get better by buying any tickets beyond that don't justify what you pay for them.
sanantoniosooner
8/21/2006, 07:59 AM
But that's still substantially more than zero, which are your odds of winning if you don't buy a ticket at all. The tiny bit your odds get better by buying any tickets beyond that don't justify what you pay for them.
substantial is a relative term
substantial is a relative term
This came straight from a stats prof, he probably knows substantially more about math than you, relatively speaking.
yermom
8/21/2006, 08:10 AM
1/1000000000000 is infinitely more than zero
that's pretty substantial :P
you can't win if you don't play
but getting cute probably doesn't get you anything
sanantoniosooner
8/21/2006, 09:40 AM
infinity is one term.
infintesimal is another.
Mathematics. A function or variable continuously approaching zero as a limit.
There's a substancial difference between the two.
SicEmBaylor
8/21/2006, 02:31 PM
you are not the first nor will you be the last political mind to be foiled by math. In fact, its quite a common occurrence.
sadly.
..'cuz its fuzzy math.
yermom
8/21/2006, 02:35 PM
infinity is one term.
infintesimal is another.
Mathematics. A function or variable continuously approaching zero as a limit.
There's a substancial difference between the two.
i don't think it's actually continuously approaching zero, that's like a function or a series or something, this is just an acutal small number
..'cuz its fuzzy math.
you know...there actually is a branch of mathematics that, for a time at least, called itself "fuzzy math"...it mostly dealt, if I remember correctly, with artificial intelligence.
Unfortunately, politicians would have no idea what fuzzy math is if it hit em on the head. The same is true with regular math.
oh, and the math being discussed here is in no way, shape, or form, fuzzy. except in your mind maybe ;)
sanantoniosooner
8/21/2006, 02:38 PM
i don't think it's actually continuously approaching zero, that's like a function or a series or something, this is just an acutal small number
The odds will decrease with each person that purchases a ticket.
If that's not approaching zero, I don't know what is.
you can't win if you don't play
however, not playing gaurantees that you won't lose....at least, you won't lose all your money buying lotto tickets.
yermom
8/21/2006, 02:50 PM
The odds will decrease with each person that purchases a ticket.
If that's not approaching zero, I don't know what is.
well, the if we are talking pick 6 kinda numbers it doesn't decrease, the investment odds might though, i may not be using the right term there, in poker it's "pot odds"
yermom
8/21/2006, 02:51 PM
however, not playing gaurantees that you won't lose....at least, you won't lose all your money buying lotto tickets.
don't get me wrong, i don't play. i'd probably rather put a dollar in a slot machine... and i HATE slot machines
skycat
8/21/2006, 02:51 PM
you know...there actually is a branch of mathematics that, for a time at least, called itself "fuzzy math"...it mostly dealt, if I remember correctly, with artificial intelligence.
Unfortunately, politicians would have no idea what fuzzy math is if it hit em on the head. The same is true with regular math.
oh, and the math being discussed here is in no way, shape, or form, fuzzy. except in your mind maybe ;)
I spent a great deal of study during grad school on Fuzzy Logic. In fact, my thesis was to be called "A Fuzzy Logic Obstacle Avoidance Algorithm for an Autonomous Mobile Robot."
And then my major professor left, and I was the premier Fuzzy Logic g***** abooter in the department. Which was a problem in that I didn't really know enough to finish. But that's another story.
Suffice it to say, when people say "Fuzzy Math" they aren't talking about real Fuzzy Math.
SicEmBaylor
8/21/2006, 02:52 PM
I have decided I will play the lottery and win.
Anyone care to give number suggestions? I'll throw one hell of a bash when I win.
skycat
8/21/2006, 02:54 PM
When it comes to playing the lottery, it makes sense to play when the expected value of a ticket becomes greater than the price of a ticket. That value can be calculated for any given lottery. And if I am not mistaken, the conditions have occurred in various lotteries from time to time.
SicEmBaylor
8/21/2006, 03:02 PM
When it comes to playing the lottery, it makes sense to play when the expected value of a ticket becomes greater than the price of a ticket. That value can be calculated for any given lottery. And if I am not mistaken, the conditions have occurred in various lotteries from time to time.
I belive the ticket is $1.00. I think I'll accept the risk of it throwing me into bankruptcy. :D
skycat
8/21/2006, 03:06 PM
I belive the ticket is $1.00. I think I'll accept the risk of it throwing me into bankruptcy. :D
The Texas Department of Education thanks you for your donation.
skycat
8/21/2006, 03:09 PM
By the way, the expected value of your Texas lottery ticket ain't $1 right now.
SoonerAtKU
8/21/2006, 03:27 PM
Would you call it irony that money from a lottery goes into education, potentially increasing a person's understanding of statistics, thereby reducing the number of people who play the lottery?
Maybe I don't know what irony means.
SicEmBaylor
8/21/2006, 03:33 PM
Would you call it irony that money from a lottery goes into education, potentially increasing a person's understanding of statistics, thereby reducing the number of people who play the lottery?
Maybe I don't know what irony means.
You'd be correct to refer to that scenerio as ironic were it true that:
A)The money actually made its way into classroom instruction.
B)The money would actually worked.
yermom
8/21/2006, 03:51 PM
Would you call it irony that money from a lottery goes into education, potentially increasing a person's understanding of statistics, thereby reducing the number of people who play the lottery?
Maybe I don't know what irony means.
nah, no one understands math even after graduating college apparently ;)
The odds will decrease with each person that purchases a ticket.
If that's not approaching zero, I don't know what is.
Your odds of winning don't go down because someone else buys a ticket, only the potential amount of money you might win.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.