[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 198 KB, 1076x504, 1372562551454.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5868903 No.5868903 [Reply] [Original]

>> No.5868932

100(.99^99)(.01)

No calculator to actually do it with at the moment

>> No.5868948

>>5868932
>computer doesn't have a calculator

is this 1975

>> No.5869262

1

>> No.5869269

0%

I don't see a question. That's not even self-referential.

>> No.5869272

>>5868903
Probably above 98%. Unless you picked a person who is physically incapable of answering questions, everyone can answer the question.

>> No.5869288

63.4%

>> No.5869291

100%

>> No.5869304

can answer != willing to answer

No answer is the answer

>> No.5869313

>>5868903
Well since you didn't specify that they need to correctly answer the question I'd say almost 100% certainty.

As evidence, most everyone in this thread has at least tried to answer it.

>> No.5869319

i really hate probability, discrete and continuous

>> No.5869320

>>5868903
P(1 can answer) = 0.01 / 100

>> No.5869355

1/100

>> No.5869465
File: 29 KB, 300x260, 1370983571727.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5869465

>probability

>> No.5869708

>99% OF PEOPLE CANT ANSWER THIS QUESTION
>what is the probability that one of them can answer this question?
step it up /sci/

>> No.5869709

Exactly one or at least one?

>> No.5869717

>>5868903

only one or at least one?

>> No.5869948

>>5869288
this

At least one: $1 - (0.99^{100}) = 0.634$

>> No.5869986

100% unless they for some reason have absolutely no means to communicate.

>> No.5870021
File: 103 KB, 548x598, pastedgraphic-1-1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5870021

>>5869304
Good

Anyway, I really am at awe at how people at /sci confuse probability with statistics. Really, there can't be any probability of that. Probability applies only to speculated scenarios (which would be needed to be portrayed in the first place)

>> No.5870360

>>5868903
99% people can't answer. so 99/100 can't answer. So (1/99)^100

>> No.5870362

>>5870360
(1/100)^100 **

>> No.5870374
File: 60 KB, 433x599, Sue_TRex_Skull_Full_Frontal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5870374

365.25 x 33 =

Clock starts at post time

>> No.5870378

>>5869320
mathematician here.

this guy is right

probability would be 10^-4

>learn stadistics

>> No.5870419

>>5870378
how is it so low

>> No.5870430

>>5870419
ya I don't get it either.

If you choose a person at random doesn't that 1 person have a 1% chance of solving it? If you add more people how does that number decrease?

Unless maybe you guys are trying to answer the question "what is the probability that _exactly one_ person can answer the question?"
But I think what it's really asking is for _at least on_ person

If I do it with probability I get 63%. I don't know any other way to solve it

>> No.5870436

>>5870378
Are you retarded? That's the probability that all of them answer the question correctly.

>> No.5870438
File: 126 KB, 561x370, the_more_you_know.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5870438

0%, question is nonsense.
Cant answer doesn't mean they are wrong

>> No.5870442

>>5868932
This.

>> No.5870458

By a strong inductive inference, the probability that a randomly selected individually can answer the question is 0.01. Thus, if N is the number of people who can answer the question correctly, we can say N~B(100,0.01)

By the binomial theorem, <span class="math">P(N=1) = \ ^{100}C _{1} \times 0.01^{1} \times 0.99^{99}= 0.99^{99}[/spoiler]

>> No.5870456

>>5870442
Well ok, now everyone is just pointing at each other saying they are right and circlejerking.

Let me make this a little bit more productive and explain why I get 63% and you guys tell me why I'm wrong.

The probability of a single person being wrong is 0.99. To find the probability that _at least_ 1 person out of 100 is correct you have to do:
1 - (probability that everyone is wrong)

and the probability that everyone is wrong is 0.99^100
So the result is:
1 - 0.99^100
which is about 63.4%

What's wrong with this?

>> No.5870462

>>5870456
Well there is a difference between what the question asks (the probability that ONE of them can) and what you thought it asks (the probability that AT LEAST ONE of them can)

>> No.5870463

>>5870462
Well there is a difference between what the question asks (the probability that ONE of them can) and what you thought it asks (the probability that EXACTLY ONE of them can)

>> No.5870464

>>5870456
>at least
The OP says one. No reason to assume otherwise.

>> No.5870466

>>5870462
>>5870464
But if 20 people can answer the question, then it is still true that one person can answer the question.

So the way the question is worded implies "at least one"

>> No.5870477

>>5870463
>>5870466
If I say "I have one banana", I COULD mean that I have at least one banana.. but no sane person would think that was what I meant. Either way, it's semantics

>> No.5870496
File: 30 KB, 699x430, onebanana.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5870496

>>5870477
Looks right to me

>> No.5870661

>>5869288
>>5869948
>>5870430
>>5870456
Assume the sentence in bold is correct, then these 3 guys are correct. That's 3 out of 36, which seems to show that the sentence in bold wasn't correct.

>> No.5870665

>>5870661
*4 guys, and I was forgetting myself, so 5 out of 37.

>> No.5871004

>>5870430
Probability considers hisrtory

>> No.5871402

I think it is 33.34%.

>> No.5871413

About a 63.4% chance

1 - (0.99^100) = 0.6339676587

>> No.5871537

100% unless you're surveying a camp of mute people. OP's question states that a person has to answer, not answer correctly.

>> No.5871582

>>5870458
Yeah, I was going to mention binomial probability, so this.

Anyway, if given 99/100 people can't answer, then it's analogous to a 100-sided die, 99 sides of which says "can't" and one of which says "can".

>> No.5871606

50%
Either one of them can or they can't.

>> No.5871621

>>5871606
/thread

>> No.5871629

>>5871606

but you're wrong.....

>> No.5871738

>>5871629
or I'm right, its a 50/50 chance

>> No.5871741

>>5871738

it's only 50/50 if there's no such thing as non local hidden variables

>> No.5871745

>>5870456
but the image says you're 99% wrong :(

>> No.5871747

>>5870496
cool

>> No.5871811

>>5871741
and they are either there or not, still 50/50

>> No.5871818

>>5871811

nope, because if local hidden variables is a 50/50 chance, and the answer to the problem is 50/50 that actually changes the answer to 25%

>> No.5871857

>>5871818
or it doesn't change anything which means there is a 50% chance

>> No.5871861

>>5871818
But either you are correct or incorrect, so there is a 50% chance it is a 50% chance, and a 50% chance is is not a 50% chance, but a 25% chance.

>> No.5871913

>>5871861

that's assuming both outcomes are equally probable

(they're not)

>> No.5871925

>>5871913
No, its assuming that half the time it doesn't work at all, but half the time it works every time.

>> No.5871929

>>5871925

i figured you were trolling, then i thought maybe you werent, but since you are, i'm out

>> No.5872389

probability that the first guy out of the hundred is right and that all the outhers are wrong:

p1 = 1/100 * 99/100 * 99/100 ... 99/100
<=> p1 = 1/100 * (99/100)^99

probability that the 2nd guy is right and that all the outhers are wrong is the same:

p2 = 1/100 * (99/100)^99

=p3
=p4
...
=p100

probability that either one of these occurrences takes place:

ptot = 100 * 1/100 * (99/100)^99
= (99/100)^99
~= 37%

>> No.5872437

>>5872389
If exactly one knows the right answer.

>>5868932
~= 37%

>> No.5872440

Since it is a game of chance, the answer is obviously 33.34%

>> No.5872483

>>5872389

the question is too vague to answer /thread

>> No.5872487

probability that at least one knows the answer:
>>5870456
probability that exactly one knows the answer:
>>5872389

>> No.5872554

>>5868903
50/50 because they either get it right or they don't.

/thread

>> No.5872576

~0%
The initial statistic is a red herring and makes no impact on the second question.

The question asks whether one of them can answer this question. So assuming it is a question asked in normal society: in everywhere except childish games, meanings are implied (if I ask who in the room are married, you don't start spouting that the chairs are not married). So we can assume that they question asks whether at least one of the them can answer, independent of correctly (so it can be right or wrong, but it can be 'not even wrong', ie. unintelligible), independent of whether it is actually answered.

So basically how many people can understand English (google says 27%), and what is the probability of selection 100 people who can't (.73^100), which means approximately 100% chance if you pick people randomly

>> No.5872579

>>5872576

I like your logic.

It's 33.34%.

>> No.5873751

>>5872579
I do not see any logic in her post.

>> No.5875223

1%

>> No.5875394

If we assume every person answers with a random real number between 0 and 1, every real between 0 and 1 number has a probability of 0 of being selected. Therefore the answer is 0.

>implying probability takes only integer %-values between 0 and 100

>> No.5876199

>>5875223
Why? Please explain.

>> No.5876207

>>5876199

he's making an assumption about the population being sampled

>> No.5876227

Bernouli wept...

Quit /sci/ and never return

>> No.5876236
File: 36 KB, 250x250, massive_fail.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5876236

>99% of people can't answer
>the following question
• unsupported claim
>answer this question
• question is vague and nonspecific
FAIL ON MASSIVE SCALE

>> No.5876251

>>5869717
seemingly purposefully ambiguous as a troll, but really just some oppa that thought he was smarter than he really is

>> No.5876288

If 99% of people can't answer it then that means 1% can. The question is, if 100 were asked the question, what is the probability that 1 would answer correctly. Since 1% will answer correctly, and 1% of 100 is 1, then 1 person will answer correctly. There is a 100% chance that 1 person out of 100 will answer correctly. The answer is 100%

>> No.5876299

>>5876251
>seemingly purposefully ambiguously as a trollsky
GTFO, Trotskyite

>> No.5876322

>>5876299
buttraged oppa that cant even formalism and clear, concise language?

>> No.5876326

>>5868903
Okay, what's the probability that NONE of them can answer:

0.99 (first guy answers wrong) x 0.99 (second answers wrong) x 0.99 (third answers wrong) until the 100th guy.

So that's 0.99^100 = 0.36603234127

That's the probability that not one of them can answer this question. So at least one of them is 1 - 0.36603234127 = 0.63396765873

And if you didn't want "at least one" but "exactly one person", then Bernoulli's principle but I am lazy.

>> No.5876331

>>5876288
No it's not. The 100 persons chosen there are assumed to not be the same exact people that were used to determine that "99% of people can't answer this question". Otherwise, it would have been mentioned that both the studies were on the same group.

OP's question basically boils down to "what is the probability that a randomly chosen group gets the statistically expected result to a test".

>> No.5876332

>>5876326
Did I say "Bernoulli's principle"? Yeah, that's not what I meant at all, fuck. Forgot the name of what I meant.

>> No.5876340

A)
100% because as it is phrased, they simply need to answer it, whether its right or wrong (unless some of them just stay silent and walk away)

B)
>99% of people cant answer the following question
there you have it, the remaining 1% can

>> No.5876354

>>5868903
It's either 0 (meaning this question makes no sense) 99, or 100. Those are my 3 guesses

>> No.5876362

>>5868903
Depends on the number of paralysed people/vegetables/retards you'd have participate

>> No.5876363

>>5876340

but you're wrong, sorry

>> No.5877488

le meta humor xD