Why It’s Hard to Recognize the Unlikely

#1
C C Offline
http://nautil.us/blog/why-its-hard-to-re...e-unlikely

EXCERPT: [...] The most unusual coincidence in my life took place when I flew from Boston, my home, to Chicago to meet Scott Isenberg, the new editor assigned to revise a statistics textbook I had authored a few years earlier. [...] Scott began to talk nostalgically about [...] his neighborhood [...] where he grew up. [...] Every remark he made about his childhood abode reminded me of something that my wife had told me. As we continued to notice more of these coincidences, I told him Debra’s name and he literally jumped out of his chair. It turned out that they had been friends in high school. You might think, what is the probability of such a rare event? It may be one in many millions.

The simple question might be “why do such unlikely coincidences occur in our lives?” But the real question is how to define the unlikely.

[...] In its essence, the idea of coincidences could be explained (somewhat simplistically) using a deck of cards. Drawing the ace of spades out of a well-shuffled deck of 52 cards is a relatively rare event: Its probability is only 1 in 52. We compute it using the mathematical rule that divides the size of the event, one card (if we’re talking about drawing any ace, this would be a size of four), by the size of the sample space for drawing a card out of a deck, which is 52, the total number of cards.

But if every day of your life you draw a card out of a deck, you can be sure to see the ace of spades sometimes. In fact, you expect this to happen roughly once in 52 draws. It is the fact that cards can be drawn repeatedly out of a deck (with reshuffling after every draw) that makes rare events show up.

This is essentially what happens in our lives. We are exposed to possible events all the time: some of them probable, but many of them highly improbable. Each rare event—by itself—is unlikely. But by the mere act of living, we constantly draw cards out of decks. Because something must happen when a card is drawn, so to speak, the highly improbable does appear from time to time.

It is the repetitiveness of the experiment that makes the improbable take place. The catch is that you can’t tell beforehand which of a very large set of improbable events will transpire. The fact that one out of many possible rare outcomes does happen should not surprise us because of the number of possibilities for extraordinary events to occur. The probabilities of these singly unlikely happenings compound statistically, so that the chance of at least one of many highly improbable events occurring becomes quite high....
Reply
#2
Magical Realist Offline
MR's law of anomalies

"In a near infinite multiverse of near infinite duration, nearly anything can happen nearly an infinite amount of times."
Reply
#3
C C Offline
(May 2, 2016 07:06 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: MR's law of anomalies

"In a near infinite multiverse of near infinite duration, nearly anything can happen nearly an infinite amount of times."


It's one thing to encounter a single, occasional coincidence or a single convergence of pseudo- meaningful / related events. But when there's a longer chain of such over a day, week, or month the "book" on it should be expanded to include even temporary sequences of faux "regulating principles" and a faux "destiny" arising as a statistical probability. The Earth itself has enjoyed an extraordinary run of luck over billions of years that few planets could ever receive: It's almost as if life and environment had been brooded over by a guardian angel in terms of the fortunate circumstances which have developed and the threats avoided / resolved. Millions of years from now some technological equivalent of godhood might even verify that Earth was only world in the Milky Way where complex life arose / survived for ages and outputted a space-faring intelligence with mutable programming capacity. All made possible by countless planets and moons quantitatively fated by the way nature generally works to be as dead as the other residents of the Sol system, so that one special, long-lived unlikelihood could become possible.
Reply
#4
Yazata Offline
(May 2, 2016 07:06 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: MR's law of anomalies

"In a near infinite multiverse of near infinite duration, nearly anything can happen nearly an infinite amount of times."

That implies that the number of possible states that a universe can assume is finite. I'm not convinced that's the case.
Reply
#5
stryder Offline
The problem with the "Picking a single card from a whole pack of cards" is while indeed there is only 52 different cards to choose from, most people don't consider how picking the card itself adds to the probability (or improbability) While indeed it won't generate a function higher than 1 in 52, making a conscious decision about where you pick a card from in a deck can make some difference.

If I picked the first card (top one) every time from the deck after it's shuffled, it put's all the probability on the weakness of the shuffle alone. It's just sticking to the top card every shuffle. This in turn means that if the shuffler has a particular weakness in how they shuffle it will be more prevalent as a coincidence.

If I pick a randomly placed card every shuffle, then I'm actually adding to the entropy which in turn should theoretically reduce coincidence, of course with a finite amount of cards this probably won't actually be noticed as any different than picking the first card.

This has previously been discussed somewhere in relationship to lotteries, as to whether picking and sticking with a particular number was more beneficial then using a random generated number from the lotto machines. I think it was suggested to be inconclusive as some people run with real world numbers that having meaning to them which are statistically more unlikely to be drawn than something that is mimicking random (PRNG).
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Sorry, Einstein: Hard workers may make better role models than geniuses C C 3 954 Mar 12, 2020 07:19 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Counting is hard when you don't have theories + Post post-truth + Everyone is biased C C 6 1,698 Jan 20, 2017 08:30 PM
Last Post: Secular Sanity



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)