Yeah, there's always people who are just bad at math. They can't add or subtract stuff if their life depended on it. Okay, fine, some people are just bad at basic math, but ...

Then there's people who don't understand how percent chance works. To me, this is even more basic stuff than simple arithmetic. I mean you don't even have to be precisely correct -- merely ballpark accurate. And yet there's people who think, for example, if they have a 10% chance of something happening, and they do it 10 times, it'll definitely happen. Or they think if there's only a 1% chance something could happen, they have to do it a bunch of times before it'll happen. Wrong on both counts.

Why is it such a difficult concept for some people to grasp that a percentage chance means that percent chance each time, non-cumulative, and that you're not "owed a win" after a significant losing streak or such?

Of course I'm sure casinos are quite happy to get gamblers who are bad at percent odds.

People like order and control. They simplify the concept of chance into a predictable outcome. Likewise, the idea of chance carries negative connotations for most people, resulting in a "glass half empty" kind of attitude as long as the chance is below 50%. I'd say, like Sensationalism, it's not really a matter of misunderstanding.

D&D is a great game for illustrating certain probabilities.

At 3/6/15 02:25 AM, CorpseGrinderClock wrote: D&D is a great game for illustrating certain probabilities.

"I attack the orge!"
"You're only going to hit him on a natural twenty... and you've failed so many times before."
"I failed nineteen times before, so of course I'm going to hit him this time!"

Exaggerated, but something like that happened when I was nerding it up.

Monty Hall

At 3/6/15 02:29 AM, someaveragechap wrote:

At 3/6/15 02:25 AM, CorpseGrinderClock wrote: D&D is a great game for illustrating certain probabilities.

"I attack the orge!"
"You're only going to hit him on a natural twenty... and you've failed so many times before."
"I failed nineteen times before, so of course I'm going to hit him this time!"

Exaggerated, but something like that happened when I was nerding it up.

that's...actually a valid point.

Also geez that player has a lousy attack bonus, an ogre only has an AC of 16

At 3/6/15 02:31 AM, Vinnyy wrote: The same could go for any RPG game with health bars and damage rates.

Ehhh...it's a little different when you are consciously rolling the probabilities for each action. Granted, it's necessary to be very good at most of them.

Everything is 50/50, you either do it or you don't, wining the lottery is 50/50 since you either win it or you don't.

At 3/6/15 03:14 AM, Ragnarokia wrote: Everything is 50/50, you either do it or you don't, wining the lottery is 50/50 since you either win it or you don't.

Everything is 100%. Everything that happens happens.

nyeah

But if you have 10% of winning and you bet 10 times, the probability you will lose all of them, assuming unconnected, is 0.9^10=0.3486784401. Hence, you have 0.6513215599 chance of winning.

it is a good approximation if the chance is really smal (say of the order 0.1% chance). if you do it 10 times and the outcomes of each trial is independent, then the chance of winning at least once is very close to 1%.

but they are absolutely correct in the quantum mechanical world. the concept of 'or' is the same as addition of complex valued functions. if you add two complex functions and take the square modulus, it is the probablity of either one event happening.

the concept of 'and' is the same as multiplcation.

At 3/6/15 12:52 AM, NeonSpider wrote: Yeah, there's always people who are just bad at math. They can't add or subtract stuff if their life depended on it. Okay, fine, some people are just bad at basic math, but ...

Hush nerd, I'll wipe my ass with your calculus homework and turn it in for you. That's what I think of your math

Try explaining to a kid or an idiot that getting a royal flush in a stack of cards is no more or less likely than any other combination.

At 3/6/15 03:14 AM, Ragnarokia wrote: Everything is 50/50, you either do it or you don't, wining the lottery is 50/50 since you either win it or you don't.

This
"Do or do not, there is no try"- Jedi Master Yoda before he rolled snakeeyes

At 3/6/15 05:39 AM, RockLou wrote: Try explaining to a kid or an idiot that getting a royal flush in a stack of cards is no more or less likely than any other combination.

Hah.... wow

You couldn't be more wrong I concur with Mahatma Ghandi

Stop bragging.

The average person goes to the casino to have fun, it's for entertainment. They don't care about percent odds. Yet another failed attempt of sounding smart.

-Frank

At 3/6/15 02:31 AM, Vinnyy wrote: The same could go for any RPG game with health bars and damage rates.

RPGs will show you which party members are terrible at math and percentages. Also, who pays attention and who does not.

You can learn much about a person by the way they roleplay. Are they a planner or do they rush into situations? Do they have team work skills? Are they a leader or a follower?

math is for people who like numbers. i dont like complex numbers so i rarely bother only if it involves money.

At 3/6/15 12:26 PM, PotHeadParadise wrote: math is for people who like numbers. i dont like complex numbers so i rarely bother only if it involves money.

Well yeah, that's kind of the point I was trying to make. Even someone who is "bad at math" should still be able to "get" something like % chance, since it's really very intuitive and you don't even have to pay much attention. Unlike adding or subtracting stuff, where you better pay attention.

You don't need to be exactly right with percentages. You just need to ballpark it. If you're off a few, no one cares. Vs. if you're off a few dollars giving someone their change back, most people would care.

At 3/6/15 12:50 PM, NeonSpider wrote: Well yeah, that's kind of the point I was trying to make. Even someone who is "bad at math" should still be able to "get" something like % chance, since it's really very intuitive and you don't even have to pay much attention. Unlike adding or subtracting stuff, where you better pay attention.

You don't need to be exactly right with percentages. You just need to ballpark it....

You might have had contradicted yourself here. There is no doubt that intuition is important in math, since it allows you to see the big picture and keep track of what's important. But the key is you need to have good intuitions, which are usually (if not always) acquired during lessons or from reference books. You aren't born with it.

Bad intuitions cause problems. Adding probabilities together directly is very intuitive (and so people who are less educated in math tend to think that if the odds are 10% and if you do it 10 times, the chance of having A ad the outcome is 100%). Proper education eliminates these bad intuitions while keeping the good ones.

At 3/6/15 12:59 PM, i-am-ghey wrote:

At 3/6/15 12:50 PM, NeonSpider wrote: Well yeah, that's kind of the point I was trying to make. Even someone who is "bad at math" should still be able to "get" something like % chance, since it's really very intuitive and you don't even have to pay much attention. Unlike adding or subtracting stuff, where you better pay attention.

You don't need to be exactly right with percentages. You just need to ballpark it....

You might have had contradicted yourself here. There is no doubt that intuition is important in math, since it allows you to see the big picture and keep track of what's important. But the key is you need to have good intuitions, which are usually (if not always) acquired during lessons or from reference books. You aren't born with it.

Bad intuitions cause problems. Adding probabilities together directly is very intuitive (and so people who are less educated in math tend to think that if the odds are 10% and if you do it 10 times, the chance of having A ad the outcome is 100%). Proper education eliminates these bad intuitions while keeping the good ones.

You're using the word "intuition" in a nonstandard way and there is your confusion. Intuition, by definition, means a thing is correctly known without having really even thought about it much. The important point is this knowledge must be correct. Otherwise it would not correctly be termed intuition. So replace every instance where you wrote "good intuition" with simply "intuition", and replace every instance where you wrote "bad intuition" with simply "incorrect notion" or something along those lines.

You will see, if you do this, there is no contradiction.

Also, intuition is not, as you incorrectly stated, "acquired during lessons or from reference books". By definition, intuition is not that which is explicitly learned, but rather that which seems to already be known, or at least that which is learned through unknown means. It is the stuff you just already seem to know.

So yes I am saying a big picture concept of percentages should work intuitively, rather than having to be something learned. It should just "come naturally". This is as opposed to mathematical operations, which must be learned. You should just "get" that rolling a standard die (singular of dice) 6 times is not guaranteed to land on 6, nor is it guaranteed to ever land on 6 after 100 rolls even though each roll has a 1 in 6 chance. This should just be something which automatically makes sense to you and which no one had to teach you.

Apparently there are people out there who lack this quite basic percent chance intuition.

Why can't you admit you were wrong. There is no need for a 1000 word essay just to save face.

You never exactly stated the exact percentage of trying 1/10 probability 10 times either op.

At 3/6/15 08:19 PM, i-am-ghey wrote: Why can't you admit you were wrong. There is no need for a 1000 word essay just to save face.

Because I'm not wrong and if I was wrong I would admit it. Simply you were using the term "intuition" in a different way from how I was, as explained above. You misunderstood what I meant, perhaps, but I wasn't wrong.

At 3/6/15 09:12 PM, dem0lecule wrote: Look @NeonSpider, having intuition doesn't mean someone not understand the problem.

This makes no sense. Obviously if someone has intuition they inherently have understanding of the problem. So maybe you want to re-word this or something, but as-is it's nonsensical. It's also possible you don't understand what you're saying or you don't understand what I'm saying.

I'm tired of pseudo intellects saying intuition is contradicted to math/science.

Okay, and? One, I never said intuition contradicted math or science. In fact, true intuition will overlap perfectly, results-wise. Two, if you are somehow implying you think I'm a "pseudo-intellect", you're dead wrong but of course your opinion has no bearing in that case since it's likely you incorrectly define "pseudo-intellect" as anyone who disagrees with you and "intelligent" as anyone who agrees with you. Also the fact that number of people who agree with a person has no bearing on correctness. If point two doesn't apply, then ignore it. It seems a strange thing to bring up if you didn't intend to imply this, however.

We are programmed in our heart and mind to have intuition. Sometime it's a hit and sometime it's a miss. How intuition works can be applied to percent chance, or probability as a whole. Intuition, unlike how you thought it contradicted to the problem, the fact is it's not!

When it's a hit, that's intuition. When it's a miss, that's a false conception. Someone who "misses" a lot isn't someone who is very intuitive of how things work.

Gamblers base their whole belief on one choice. Bad gamblers do that. But experienced high rollers who base on calculated intuitive decisions to get the correct outcome.

Well yes. Smart gamblers will work the odds and know when to cut their losses or push their luck. And it won't always turn out in their favor, but at least they have an understanding and some strategy which is statistically favorable.

This article is a good read for you to explain how intuition plays a role in mathematics. A simple explanation to begin with.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/when-intuition-and-math-probably-look-wrong

I never said intuition didn't play a role in mathematics. Intuition plays a role in everything. A more intuitive person will have an easier time grasping new concepts. A less intuitive person will need more work to get there. More trial-and-error.

I followed the standard dictionary definition for the word intuition, which is the direct perception of truth. In many cases, including the aforementioned example, you will have the wrong conclusion if you take whatever perceive as obvious fact.

At 3/6/15 09:45 PM, NeonSpider wrote:

At 3/6/15 08:19 PM, i-am-ghey wrote: Why can't you admit you were wrong. There is no need for a 1000 word essay just to save face.

Because I'm not wrong and if I was wrong I would admit it. Simply you were using the term "intuition" in a different way from how I was, as explained above...

Yeah, of course you would. The funny thing is that you have never, ever admitted your mistakes since you are do perfect.

What an ass, Prof Knows-It-All-And-Wheneven-You-Don't-Agree-With-Me-You-Are-Wrong-in-Fact-I-Am-Above-Everyone-Else

But I guess you probably don't know that much about math or science anyway do I will just leave you alone.

I don't' like "% chance" , I'm more of a ratio guy

At 3/7/15 04:10 AM, i-am-ghey wrote: What an ass, Prof Knows-It-All-And-Wheneven-You-Don't-Agree-With-Me-You-Are-Wrong-in-Fact-I-Am-Above-Everyone-Else

But I guess you probably don't know that much about math or science anyway do I will just leave you alone.

Looks like I have to do this (because you are being an ass) so here goes. ... Definitions taken directly from dictionary.com with important words emphasized.

noun
1.
direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
2.
a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
3.
a keen and quick insight.
4.
the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
5.
Philosophy.

an immediate cognition of an object not inferred or determined by a previous cognition of the same object.
any object or truth so discerned.
pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.

6.
Linguistics. the ability of the native speaker to make linguistic judgments, as of the grammaticality, ambiguity, equivalence, or nonequivalence of sentences, deriving from the speaker's native-language competence.

------

Okay, so we know that, to qualify as intuition, a thing absolutely *must* be true. So I guess let's pull out the definitions of both "truth" and "fact" since perhaps you are confused as to what qualifies as a truth or a fact??

-----

noun, plural truths
[trooth z, trooths] (Show IPA)
1.
the true or actual state of a matter:
He tried to find out the truth.
2.
conformity with fact or reality; verity:
the truth of a statement.
3.
a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like:
mathematical truths.
4.
the state or character of being true.
5.
actuality or actual existence.
6.
an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7.
honesty; integrity; truthfulness.

noun
1.
something that actually exists; reality; truth:
Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.
something known to exist or to have happened:
Space travel is now a fact.
3.
a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true:
Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened:
The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
5.
Law.. Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence.
Compare question of fact, question of law.

--- Checkmate

It's not so much that I'm "always right" as it is that you or others happen to be wrong on some things but somehow can't accept this. Due to your own lack of perception, you are guilty of the very thing you incorrectly accuse me of.

At 3/7/15 04:18 AM, Swag-in-a-Bag wrote: I don't' like "% chance" , I'm more of a ratio guy

It's the same thing. So whichever way is easier to comprehend for you makes no difference. They are mathematically equivalent and, thus, merely minor representational differences.

Also, getting percentages *exactly* correct is not useful. Reason being is things will never *exactly* match up, so "close enough" is good enough. If there is a correctly calculated 23.337548% chance of something but you instead calculate 25% chance, for real-world scenarios this is just as correct and may even be more correct (or less), but you won't know until results actually happen and you tally them, at which point it is no longer a percentage chance. In any case, it's most certainly "good enough". That's not the case with discrete numbers, which absolutely *must* be ideal.

I don't know how to deal with this guy. Any help?