tsimionescu 2 days ago

I'm not saying that we'll see the all six combination if we actually threw a million dice. I'm saying that if we throw a million dice, we'll see some combination, and that should be just as amazing as the all six combination, because, whatever it is, it was monumentally unlucky to happen.

My only point is that there is no way to say "events with probability < X are impossible in real life", for X > 0. For any probability value, it's trivial to construct an experiment that will be guaranteed to have an outcome whose probability is that low.

Reply View 2 replies
  • prmph a day ago

    This argument I think hints at something i regard as mysterious regarding probability as applied to the real world (as opposed to the platonic, pure math concept)

    My own view is that there something deep about probability akin to the measurement problem. My view is that probability is not an objective fixed thing, but that it is something relative to the observer of experiments.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • tsimionescu a day ago

      > My view is that probability is not an objective fixed thing, but that it is something relative to the observer of experiments.

      This is basically the Bayesian view of probability - that probability is a measure of the knowledge of an agent, not a property of a system. There are even some interpretations of QM that try to find a way to apply this to the measurement problem.

      However, for this particular case, I don't think there is anything all that mysterious. If a process is more or less equally likely to produce any of a huge number of outcomes, it stands to reason that you can't predict which outcome will happen, even while knowing some outcome is fully guaranteed.

      Reply View 0 replies