/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8600305

Small peen

https://youtu.be/aThCr0PsyuA?t=38s

>>8600306
FACT: me on the bottom.

>>8600341
12 year old chink qt

nice

0.9999... = 1

>>8600306
what you posted is cringe worthy, but probably not for the reason you posted it

>>8600305
What, an arrow? Really makes you think

>>8600526
implying i think its cringe worthy
checkmate

>>8600503
Why would you do it with log?
Log doesn't get you OUT of infinity. Silly human.

>>8600305
I like it that those are obviously white people. No darkies on our planet!

>>8600305
because of pluto? i don't get it really

>>8600306
don't have to be einstein to find the meme drive cringe

>>8600315
funny not cringe

>>8600320
not watching that thing

>>8600502
funny

>>8600503
you are the cringeworthy one

>>8600305
Satellites?

No vulva

>>8600305

Belly buttons! Adam and Eve didn't have belly buttons.


Checkmate scientists!

>>8600305
>Most humans can't understand picture
>Expect aliens could

>>8600320
What is wrong with that?

>tfw a 140 iq cuck

>>8600503
actually the correct form is
[math]lim(0.9999999..) → 1[/math]

>>8602964
no

>>8602967
t. freshman calc 1 student
come back after real analysis..

>>8600305
lmao what a tiny penis that fag has

>>8602971
>freshman
>calc 1
baka @ you brainlets

>>8602999
>a trump voter
Oh, that explains a lot.

>>8603006
Le Trump meme

>>8600305
The woman is obviously missing a feminine penis

>>8603038
forgot this

>>8600503

I cringed

>>8602904

Yeah cause the aliens trying to solve it will definitely be fat weeaboo alt rightists and not their top astronomers/cosmologists

>>8600305
So I understand everything on the image except the two circles with the line connecting them. What's that supposed to depict?

>>8603257
illuminati symbology

only illuminati aliens will understand

>>8603257
Hydrogen, I think. Not sure why it's there.

>>8603145
>Yeah cause the aliens trying to solve it will definitely be fat weeaboo alt rightists and not their top astronomers/cosmologists

I wouldn't be surprised if the picture leaked and it ended up in their own version of 4chan and someone made a thread about how their version of jews fabricated this to make them believe that they were not alone in the universe, despite what their version of the bible says.

>>8603265
Because it's the fundamental element desu...

>>8600320
I do like how Microsoft is using Minecraft to advertise their future-product. A game they've attempted to kill multiple times, both through creating incompatibilities with OpenGL and with Java.

>>8600305
It's because everyone knows Pluto is no longer a planet duh

>>8602087
We have to show them what our scientists look like anon

>>8603272
>tfw aliens use our 4chan

The answer to the Bertrand's box "paradox" is 1/2.

The fallacies that lead people to believe it's 2/3:
People believe that there are 3 gold coins and 1 silver coin to choose from at random, rather than 2 boxes to pick between at random.
And
People fail to recognize that drawing a gold coin isn't a matter of chance, and that regardless of whether you reach into the gold-gold box or the gold-silver box, the framework of the "paradox" is that drawing a gold coin is absolute certainty.

The probability only comes into play when choosing the box, not when drawing the second coin. You have a 1 in 2 chance of picking the gold-gold box, a 1 in 2 chance of picking the gold-silver box, and no chance of picking the silver-silver box. Drawing a gold coin at first is again, a certainty.

>>8600305

>>8603737
>no chance of picking the silver-silver box
if you list all of the possibilities, then there is a "chance" to get silver first, a 1/2 chance to get silver first. however, you get the 1/2 chance that gold comes out, meaning it's a certainty the silver-silver box is not picked. For the same reasons that there's a 0% chance of getting silver at the beginning, you also have a 2/3 chance of getting gold twice in a row.

The 0% chance only becomes a reality once you know you got gold. If you don't know that, it's a 1/2 chance.

Exact same thing with getting gold twice in a row.

This is pretty similar to the Monty Hall problem and only absolute idiots will believe there is no difference between switching and staying

>>8603758
Except that's wrong. The only two possibilities are:
You pick a gold coin from the gold-gold box, or you pick a gold coin from the gold-silver box.

Getting a gold coin is a certainty, the only option is which box you pick it from, and it's impossible to pick from the silver-silver box.

>>8603821
How in the world are you posting in a high IQ thread when you cannot understand probability?

Is this bait?

>>8600315
climate change isn't real

>>8600305

>>8603865
I understand probability, you just don't understand how to apply probability to this problem.

You treat impossible outcomes as if they had a chance of occurring.

You can't pick the silver-silver box, you aren't magically twice as likely to pick the gold-gold box just because there are two gold coins in there, and if you pick the mixed box then it's certain you picked the gold coin from it.

You think you're picking between 3 gold coins, two of which result in you picking another gold coin. In reality, you're picking between two boxes, and one box will give you the desired result and the other won't.

You're just confused. You put all the numbers in and trusted the math. You forgot to apply logic.

>>8603903
Not the anon you are replying to, but think about it like this:

How do you get this first golden coin?
By trying.
You pick a box at random.
If the first coin drawn is silver:
Reset everything and start from the beginning.
If it is gold, the question is now, how big the probability is, that this is the gold-gold-box.
And this obviously has to be 2 times as high as it being the silver-gold-box, because 1/2 of the silver-gold-box picks didn't make it to this step.

>>8600320
Oh my me, that guy's spaceship drawing though....

>>8600320
I'm a plumber and
>1:09

>>8604196
I'm not a plumber, why is it funny?

>>8600320
didn't they ditch the whole project?

>>8604039
Except you're adding to the original question. It explicitly removes the possibility of a silver being drawn first.

You'd be right if that wasn't the case, and your logic applies fine to the Monty Hall problem, just not here.

>>8604572
>It explicitly removes the possibility of a silver being drawn first.
No it does not. It says that we look at a case where a golden coin has been drawn. Not that it was impossible to draw a silver one in the first place.

>>8600305
Just came here to say that i'm too smart for this thread and will ignore it. Only people with IQs above 180 will understand this

>>8604236
>How do I screw a trap?

>>8605136
155 iq required to cringe

>>8600320
I may have interned at a NASA center. VR Mars is a thing. I wore the headset, but I'm not sure if it was HoloLens or not.

>>8605227
was it good?

>>8600306
Cringed and 128 IQ

>>8603751
Thanks doc

>>8606110
cringed at 7 trillion IQ