Re: Lottery facts for Sherry

Hi John,
Since, as usual, your post is 99% drivel I shall respond to only the one
point that has any substance.
do you know why you weren't able
to get someone to explain to you how to test a coin and then post
his answer with the pretense that you were able to at least
perceive the obvious starting point?
I believe I correctly answered your question. I shall quote;
"The methods for testing a coin are simple enough.
There are a couple of commonly used test.
We used the Posterior probability density something, something. We conducted
a test by tossing a coin a predetermine number of times (n) and noted the
number of resulting heads (h) and tails (t).
We then let the r be the actual probability of obtaining heads in a single
toss of the coin (the value desired). After flipping the coin n times, we
plugged the numbers into Bayes' theorem (which is a very dry piece of
mathematics you can look up anywhere)."

As you appear to be unable grasp the simplified answer, I hold little hope
of you being able to understand the full thorium. However if you wish to
take a go at it then that is fine, as it will keep you busy for a week or
so. I took a moment to look up a link for you (as you appear unable to use a
search engine) so that you can see the validity of my reply.
It explains both Posterior probability density (I have since learned that
full reference should have been 'Posterior probability density function', if
you wish to split hairs) and Bayes' theorem in detail.
Simply cut and paste it to your browser window (you are very proficient at
that).
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:wai7CXr2LqYJ:www.math.uah.edu/stat/point/Bayes.xhtml+%22Posterior+probability+density%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=7

If you have still have a problem with my answer I suggest you take it up
with Thomas Bayes. Although he has been dead for many a year, I am sure one
of the voices in your head can put you in touch with him.

John, if you are the great math whiz that you purport to be, you surely have
learned the difference between theoretical and practical mathematics.
The concept of a "fair coin" is a subject that every high school student has
dealt with.
I realize that you do not understand this, as your education was limited,
but accept it, gather yourself up and lets move along.

Having answered all your questions, please use you great intellect to answer
the one question that is heart of the debate;
You have been captured by terrorist and taken to their camp in the desert.
Here they have a game whose rules are simple.
You must pick a number from 1 to 6.
They then roll a die on the commander's desk.
If you have chosen correctly you can go free.
If you have chosen incorrectly you die a slow horrible death.
Since being held prisoner you have seen this game played out 100 times
before.
You have seen the number 6 come up 85 times, the number 5 come up 5 times,
the number 4 come up 4 times, the number 3 come up 3 times, the number 2 has
come up twice and the number 1 has come up only once.
You are dragged to the commander's office, the guard holds the die in his
hand, you are ordered to choose a number.
What number do you choose and why?

Sorry, no asking for a fair (or loaded die), no asking that it be rolled in
a vacuum
chamber, no getting diarrhea of the mouth in the hopes they lose interest
and go away.

http://www.lionetwork.net/spaw/images/RoadRunner.jpg
BLEEP-BLEEP

------------------------
"John Griffin" <thathillbilly@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns98016EA784F0Athathillbillyyahooco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Non Sequitur Incarnate, in the person of "Illiterate Bimbo Sherry
Davis" <NoSpam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[ same old logorrhage, as predicted
(several times, as predicted) ]

There are two things about your spastic gobble that might
interest you.

First, you didn't invent the escape mechanism you're hiding
under. It isn't at all unusual for someone who proves unable to
participate in newsgroup badinage to stand outside and squawk
rote idiocy through the window. (Look up "metaphor" before you
embellish your standard self-slapping by commenting on the
physical implausibility, airhead, but please don't let that new-
to-you concept stop you.)

Second, your frenetic attempts to convince yourself that you're
enjoying it are the weakest ever observed. You don't do your
laughable fanfaronade any better than you do numbers and letters.

That reminds me...speaking of observations, before you ran to
hide behind your rote yapping, do you know why you weren't able
to get someone to explain to you how to test a coin and then post
his answer with the pretense that you were able to at least
perceive the obvious starting point? See below.

Your "team building" skills are almost as poor as your verbal
skills...a brain-dead infant and the world's wimpiest ***.
Hilarious.

Your "mental health councilor" imposture isn't improving with
repetition. The good news is that it couldn't possibly get any
more fatuous...unless you get your team to help you, of course.
Damn, that synergization of fatuity would be fuckin' hilarious!)



.

Quantcast