Author Topic: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)  (Read 4566 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kav

• www.Roulette30.com
• Hero Member
• Posts: 2178
• Thanked: 1131 times
• Gender:
Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« on: April 11, 2016, 03:07:56 AM »
You may remember me sounding like a lunatic talking to himself, when i tried to explain that we should always have some sort of doubt when talking about roulette probabilities equations. Because probabilities have not the certainty of mathematics - they are not axiomatic.

Well, it seems I'm not the only lunatic. I found another one and he happens to be the greatest mathematical physicist of all time and a science philosopher: Henry Poincaré.
In Science and Hypothesis, Chapter XI he writes:
"The very name 'calculus of probabilities' is a paradox. Probability opposed to certainty is what we do not know, and how can we calculate what we do not know?"

Gazebo - Lunatic
« Last Edit: April 11, 2016, 05:28:56 AM by kav »

Mike

• Great Contributor
• Posts: 841
• Thanked: 150 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2016, 09:59:54 AM »

Nice try Kav, but no cigar. In the first place, it's highly debatable whether Poincare was the "greatest mathematical physicist of all time". Most people have never heard of him, and would probably put Newton or Einstein in that place.

This is tricky of you, because in the book Poincare obviously means the question to be a rhetorical one, because he then goes on to explain the laws of probability, law of large numbers, etc. A classic case of quoting out of context.

In any case, it doesn't matter what any so called expert has to say about probability not being certaintly, when you can find out for yourself assuming you have some basic programming skills. Even a spreadsheet analysis will be good enough.

This is another example of taking a scientific term and misinterpreting to mean what it implies in everyday discourse. When you say something is "probable" it means it isn't certain, but in the technical sense "probability" doesn't necessarily mean that. In fact there are several interpretations of what "probability" means, and there is no general consensus, but that doesn't mean you can then triumphantly shout "See! no one even knows what probability IS!".

This is because whatever interpretation you prefer, the math remains the same. The law of large numbers isn't an interpretation but a "law of nature", if you like. Empirical probabilities don't "probably" converge to their theoretical counterparts, they CERTAINLY do.

scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2487
• Thanked: 545 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2016, 01:17:20 PM »

Nice try Kav, but no cigar. In the first place, it's highly debatable whether Poincare was the "greatest mathematical physicist of all time". Most people have never heard of him, and would probably put Newton or Einstein in that place.

This is tricky of you, because in the book Poincare obviously means the question to be a rhetorical one, because he then goes on to explain the laws of probability, law of large numbers, etc. A classic case of quoting out of context.

In any case, it doesn't matter what any so called expert has to say about probability not being certaintly, when you can find out for yourself assuming you have some basic programming skills. Even a spreadsheet analysis will be good enough.

This is another example of taking a scientific term and misinterpreting to mean what it implies in everyday discourse. When you say something is "probable" it means it isn't certain, but in the technical sense "probability" doesn't necessarily mean that. In fact there are several interpretations of what "probability" means, and there is no general consensus, but that doesn't mean you can then triumphantly shout "See! no one even knows what probability IS!".

This is because whatever interpretation you prefer, the math remains the same. The law of large numbers isn't an interpretation but a "law of nature", if you like. Empirical probabilities don't "probably" converge to their theoretical counterparts, they CERTAINLY do.

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. " Albert Einstein

kav

• www.Roulette30.com
• Hero Member
• Posts: 2178
• Thanked: 1131 times
• Gender:
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2016, 01:38:23 PM »
Mike,

You may be right in most of your points.
You can not imagine however my feeling when I read Poincare's quote.
I am just sharing the joy :-)
Therefore the song.

Btw, did you know that d'Alembert, the great mathematician, was a proponent of gambler's fallacy?

Mike

• Great Contributor
• Posts: 841
• Thanked: 150 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2016, 04:48:58 PM »
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. " Albert Einstein

"The only way to beat roulette is to steal chips when the dealer isn't looking". Albert Einstein.

scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2487
• Thanked: 545 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2016, 08:35:16 PM »
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. " Albert Einstein

"The only way to beat roulette is to steal chips when the dealer isn't looking". Albert Einstein.

So why do you and REAL think  YOU can beat roulette  ? And  without the aid of a computer too ?

Real

• Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1693
• Thanked: 283 times
• Gender:
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2016, 01:39:32 AM »
Quote
So why do you and REAL think  YOU can beat roulette  ? And  without the aid of a computer too ?

Because we're beating the wheel, rather than the random game.

Real

• Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1693
• Thanked: 283 times
• Gender:
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2016, 01:40:06 AM »
In this thread, why is it not possible to edit/modify a post?

« Last Edit: April 12, 2016, 02:07:23 AM by kav »

scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2487
• Thanked: 545 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2016, 03:19:42 AM »
Quote
So why do you and REAL think  YOU can beat roulette  ? And  without the aid of a computer too ?

Because we're beating the wheel, rather than the random game.
In the U.K., REAL, you would be hard pushed to find a wheel sufficiently biased to exploit . Modern wheels are not the wheels of old.
I know that engineers will tell you that nothing man-made is “ perfect”  hence some people, like yourself , believe that roulette wheels must therefore be biased and exploitable. Your  theory/hypothesis  is flawed however because the wheel must be  SUFFICIENTLY  biased to BE exploitable.
The numbers you see for your claimed bias are just as likely to be simply random numbers .What mathematician or Physicist agrees with your idea -without the use of  a computer ? And why aren’t the thousands  of Physicists, Mathematicians and their students flocking to casinos to fleece them using your method? Because they are too dumb and need the help of your book ?
You are faced with the  problem of “ How many spins are needed to ascertain whether or not the wheel  can be “ beaten “ .The same number as is claimed that the method player needs- anything from 30,000 to 1 million - and you claim that you can do this in ONE session ?
You also claim that the casino will keep on paying winners no matter the amount they win. Why then do you  “ fly beneath the radar” ?
There you are, standing at the table becoming animated each and every time the dealer  picks up the ball to start his spin - and you think you are not noticed !
Get Real REAL  !

Real

• Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1693
• Thanked: 283 times
• Gender:
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2016, 03:51:41 AM »
Quote
"The only way to beat roulette is to steal chips when the dealer isn't looking". Albert Einstein.

Mike,

I'm still amazed that some system junkies will discount all mathematicians, gaming experts, recorded history, and even Einstein in place of a roulette system player that's posting on a roulette forum.

ernroo1

• New
• Posts: 51
• Thanked: 8 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2016, 07:11:59 AM »
Some people are too smart for their own good.

I'm not claiming to be smarter than Einstein, but lets not act like he is the final word on everything. He is just a man at the end of the day in a time where he could only dream of the technology we have today.

Anything is possible.

Happy subatomic vibrations

Mike

• Great Contributor
• Posts: 841
• Thanked: 150 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2016, 09:54:27 AM »
My reply with the Einstein quote was just to make the point that it's possible back up your agenda by using any quote from an "expert", and usually taken out of context.

Quote
I'm not claiming to be smarter than Einstein, but lets not act like he is the final word on everything. He is just a man at the end of the day in a time where he could only dream of the technology we have today.

Anything is possible.

I agree in one respect. We should should put our trust in authority if the experts in question are experts on the thing we actually want to know about. If you want to know about relatively, Einstein's your man. Roulette? not so much.

Actually I think you ARE claiming to be smarter than Einstein, because he clearly believed that some things were NOT possible. For example, he said regarding the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum theory that "God does not play dice".

Trilobite

• Mature Member
• Posts: 386
• Thanked: 150 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2016, 09:54:32 AM »
...whatever interpretation you prefer, the math remains the same...

Probability has no volition of its own.

It is a complete slave to the maths and no one can ever change that, even if you can.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2016, 09:57:30 AM by Trilobite »

scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2487
• Thanked: 545 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2016, 03:07:17 PM »
My reply with the Einstein quote was just to make the point that it's possible back up your agenda by using any quote from an "expert", and usually taken out of context.

Quote
I'm not claiming to be smarter than Einstein, but lets not act like he is the final word on everything. He is just a man at the end of the day in a time where he could only dream of the technology we have today.

Anything is possible.
#
#

I agree in one respect. We should should put our trust in authority if the experts in question are experts on the thing we actually want to know about. If you want to know about relatively, Einstein's your man. Roulette? not so much.

Actually I think you ARE claiming to be smarter than Einstein, because he clearly believed that some things were NOT possible. For example, he said regarding the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum theory that "God does not play dice".
Mike
Einstein WAS  clearly wrong about roulette being unbeatable except by cheating.
What I asked both you and REAL was to answer my questions regarding your "The Only Way " system " and others will note that both of you  have avoided  doing so , and draw their own conclusions.

Mike

• Great Contributor
• Posts: 841
• Thanked: 150 times
Re: Science and Hypothesis. The meaning of probability (for Mike)
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2016, 03:47:08 PM »
scepticus,

Both Real and I have answered your questions many times before, it's not our problem if you don't accept the answers. You continue to be utterly confused and don't understand the difference between biased wheel AP and VB, as is evident from this comment:

Quote
There you are, standing at the table becoming animated each and every time the dealer  picks up the ball to start his spin - and you think you are not noticed !

Not only that, but your grasp of probability and math is practically non-existent, so there's really no point in arguing with you. Sorry.

And please stick to the topic of this thread. It's not about AP, as much as you seem to want it to be.