My view is there are only 4 ways they can land - all heads, all tails, two heads, and two tails. Ergo it's one in 4. The text splits it down to individual quarters:
HHH
HHT
HTH
THH
TTH
THT
HTT
TTT
It reasons that there are 3 out of the 8 landings which produce a 2-head response. But those 3 (HHT, HTH, THH) are all the same answer, so those 3 only count as 1 result. It's like saying 1+2+3 and 2+3+1 and 3+1+2 are three different equations, but they're not. They all produce the same result, so they are just 3 different ways of stating the same single equation. And the question wasn't how many ways can you state the result, it asks what is the overall end result? And the end result is there's only 4 different ways they can land.
?
*runs away from the math*
I never understood probability, all I know is this:
If people are asked to fake randomness, they make it TOO random, thus obvious.
The question is "What are the chances they will land with 2 heads and 1 tail showing?". "Chances" is based on the technical term "probability", which is defined as "successful outcomes (in this case two heads) divided by total possible outcomes". The chart shows 3 outcomes with two heads, out of 8.And the question wasn't how many ways can you state the result, it asks what is the overall end result?
The question is "What are the chances they will land with 2 heads and 1 tail showing?". "Chances" is based on the technical term "probability", which is defined as "successful outcomes (in this case two heads) divided by total possible outcomes". The chart shows 3 outcomes with two heads, out of 8.
Personally, if I wanted to argue, I'd spend my time in a thread about tongues or the virtues of Catholicism.
You should be in my class. I'd give you 40 points for two week's worth of great comments.I'm not looking to argue, just to understand. And there's already a ton of threads on tongues and Catholicism. Sometimes it's nice to step back from the firing line and take a break with something else. A momentary diversion, as it were.
But this also applies, somewhat, to scripture interpretation. How do you look at things? Someone who sticks to a strict analytical book knowlege would answer 3/8 based on the "HHT" charting. Someone who lives a more street-functional existence will answer 1/4 because, as they lay on the floor, HHT, HTH, and THH are functionally all one and the same result. 2 heads and 1 tail. Applied to, say, tongues, a book analyst might just find them dead. But a guy in the trenches, looking more at the overall results than the critical analysis, will find that they're alive and well. And isn't that somewhat what we find here on the tongue threads? The bookworms are against it, the worker bees are for it. In general that is.
Does that make any sense and make it more appropriate for discussion?
It would be interesting to take 3 quarters and toss them 100 times, logging the overall results, and see what that trial shows.
On a related note, I found these interesting tidbits: according to a university study, a coin flipped will land showing the side that was originally up 51% of the time. And a coin spun on it's edge will land tails up 80% of the time, because the head side is slightly heavier.
And I have flipped a quarter and seen it land on it's edge. How does that figure into the equation?
OK, enough diversion. What thread is Zone on?![]()
1 and 3 which equal 4 are both "odds"
3 and 5 which equal 8 are both "odds"
lol