/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11826209
Idk but it worked for the first five numbers I tried. Pretty fun game. Here's one for your post number.

>>11826221

>>11826221
>>11826226
Dude I know it's a bit of a novelty but this isn't a GET thread. And I swear to christ if I get digits on this post I'll chuck my laptop out the window

>>11826229

ILLUMINORTY

>>11826221
>>11826226
>>11826236
>>11826239
Based and getpilled.

>>11826255
oooooooh snap

>>11826255
>55
I fucking hate you all

DUDE

not corona but look at this shit, this is a real academic book and not some meme

At first I thought this was some kind of baiting, then I started to increase the number one by one. This shit has worked up to 1001. Could it be a coincidence?

>>11826277
if your last four digits are in a corona story then you will get the disease

watchc this get

>>11826348
RIP

>>11826354

>>11826348
>>11826353
I'm doomed dude

>>11826365

what did google mean by this?

>>11826365
basado

>>11826365
wtf

>>11826209
It's not much of a surprise. You have hundreds of sources of reporting an incrementing number, daily, for 100+ days. Parroted by thousands of media sources.There's millions of covid-19 articles out there.

>>11826365
include me in the screencap

>>11826365
Whaa...? How...?

only 20 cases, not bad for washington

>>11826365
>>>/x/

wow this is so smart the virus doesnt exist after all thank you anon

>>11826365
... holy

>>11826365
>8 IPs

>>11826416
That wasn't the point of the thread you dumb shit

>>11826365

Jesus Christ /pol/shitters are dumb.

Oh shit

>try to make a thread about something I'm curious about that involves statistical distributions and epidiomiological mathematics
>retards go hurdur number lol

>>11826382
It's statistically impossible

>>11827269
I mean assuming it's random yes, but diseases don't spread that way

>>11827275
It's not the fucking disease, it's the idea that someone wrote a news article for each and every one of those numbers of people that were supposedly touched?

Explain the math of how this is reasonable and I'll concede. I start with the observable premise that this does not seem normal.

There's thousands of places around the world that are being reported from. Most of them have reported numbers dozens of times. Your results conflate cases of infection and death.

Even if it isn't being spammed by the media, there's still enough opportunity for all three digit numbers to be generated legitimately.

The reason you see all of them, of course, is because the media is greedy. But that doesn't mean there's a conspiracy. They just rode the wave of massive public fascination with corona-chan.

>>11827269
You dont know stats.

>>11827305
There are over 1000 daily newspapers in the us.
They have multiple articles about covid in a week.

>>11827328
Explain the stats please. I will take back everything I have proposed and even deliver on a dare you may give me IF you can explain the mathematical probability of this occuring.

>>11827305
>>11827269
see >>11827326

>>11827328
you are getting results from all over the world, not only the us

>>11826365
what

No reports for exactly 824 new cases, but there are reports for 824 new deaths. Has anyone found a number with neither yet?

>>11827305
>I start with the observable premise that this does not seem normal
this is not an observation

>>11827379
Still waiting for your numbers tough guy lol

>>11827398
you have not even asked question

>>11827398
to be more specific, you have not asked a question in a way that makes clear how it should be answered (if you had, you would have simply answered it yourself). a clear question is something like "train A leaves station B at time T...", where it's clear what model should be used to calculate

so this thread is about you presenting an intuition you have about coronavirus articles

when i pointed out that your intuition about those articles is not an observation, you become defensive. the observation is that there are enough articles with a number of sick/dead/other in the title, to cover most or all three digit numbers

i can try to guess why you think this is implausible, then create a model of the article generation process (as i think you view it), and see if i can find any mistakes. but if i don't satisfy your unknown criteria, then i will be open to accusations to strawmanning you, because all i'm doing is guessing how you think. this should be your job

>>11827444
nah you know exactly what I asked you to do twice but cant do it so you wrote a lengthy post instead. I skimmed it, 2/10 but points for effort, go back to /pol/ retard, leave us.

>>11827486
i have simply explained to you why nobody will answer your question. it requires putting in effort disproportionately to the amount of effort you put in asking the question, doubly so when they risk doing it all for nothing (because it's vague enough for you to pretend you meant something else)

if you want a low effort answer, it is simple enough to point out that you have not restricted the pool of articles by placing any restrictions whatsoever on what the number in the title is a number of. it can be a number of total sick, number of currently sick(so it goes up and down), number of newly dead(happens at different rates), number of newly infected between date x and date y in z age group, and so on. trivially, we can find articles containing any number in the title, for an even greater range of numbers than three digit numbers, by including articles that report on all sorts of statistics. there has been no shortage of those, during the coronavirus news cycle.

more importantly perhaps, if an article for a number we are interested in does not exist, we can create one ourselves. this is because the physical processes exist, such that they generate facts in the world, that we can measure and then report (write an article about) without any difficulty, while still restricting ourselves to facts about coronavirus.

this is my suspicion anyway. you may now tell me why this is strawmanning you. you see, even this was a waste of my effort. i only write this because of my enormous work ethic :^)

>>11827336
>50 states
>x 3 newspapers a state
>x 90 days
= 13500 articles in the US alone. Assume they are random then there will be 13 articles for each number. Then expand for new deaths, the world, no. of publications is probably an underestimate....

>>11826209
314 cases did not work.

>>11828274
lmao couldn't tame based pi. I bt 2718 and 271 gonna bust a nut on corona.

>>11828274
>2 seconds of Google
>Second link: State reports just 314 new coronavirus cases and 5 deaths
suck me

There were a lot of cases and there are a lot of places in the world
Also check em

>>11826365
what about it? i don't get it. 365 new cases. so?
3rd one doesn't even have a date.

>>11826365
also the post is linked to itself, so the post number is fake

>>11830000
Finally the only one who will not be able to do this

>>11830000
check the quoted post

also, checked

>>11830012

>>11826277
>Could it be a coincidence?
Yes.