FLUKEY OR SPOOKY? Incredible real-life coincidences ...or are they?

[Ivan Seeking]

I have no idea if any of these stories are true.

TWO sisters decided to pay a surprise visit to each other. As they travelled in opposite directions along a rural highway in America, their identical jeeps collided and both were killed. Is this just coincidence or are there greater forces at work, bringing us closer than we ever thought possible? A fascinating new book, Beyond Coincidence, examines this baffling phenomenon. Here CLARE MORRISROE describes the most bizarre stories of them all...

THE KEY

CALIFORNIAN Williard Lovell locked herself out of her house. She spent 10 minutes trying to find a way in when the postman handed her a letter from her brother. In it was the spare key he had taken back to Washington after a visit.

TWO LAURAS

IN June 2001, 10-year-old Laura Buxton of Burton, Staffs, was at a party where she wrote her name and address on a luggage label, attached it to a helium balloon and released it into the sky. It floated 140 miles until finally coming to rest in the garden of another 10-year-old Laura Buxton, in Pewsey, Wilts. The girls got in touch and became friends, upon which they found each had fair hair, owned a black Labrador, guinea pig and rabbit.[continued]

http://www.people.co.uk/news/content_objectid=14051913_method=full_siteid=55768 _headline=-FLUKEY%2DOR%2DSPOOKY%2D-name_page.html

Similar stories?

When I was fifteen, an older friend and I took a 250 [roundtrip] mile bicycle ride from a suburb of Los Angeles to a camping area in the mountains above the town of Hemet. The trip out required about 18 hours of pedaling; much of it either up hill and/or through the desert. Since for a good part of the trip the primary highway was off limits to cyclists, for about eight of the eighteen hours we road along miles and miles of hot, flat, lonely desert roads that were well off the beaten tract. Right about the time I thought we had actually arrived at the middle of nowhere, being about eighty miles from my home and forty miles from any significant population centers, far ahead we noticed a small figure emerging from the blurry heat layer above the road. As we approached what we could then see was a rider on a horse, I finally saw that it was a fellow classmate - a girl from my [current] ninth grade class. It turned out that her family owned land out there and often spent weekends in the desert. She was the only person that we saw for many hours.

This is the one that really gets me. At age sixteen I was a complete off-road motorcycle nut. I often went to a place called El Mirage dry lake bed with one or several friends for some desert biking. The lake bed is surrounded by miles and miles of sand dunes and hills. On one unlucky occasion, while riding with just one other friend we got lost in the dunes. We had no visible points of reference and had gotten completely turned around. Having about one gallon of gasoline left in our tanks and only a little water, and since it was about a hundred degrees out that day…at least, we agreed that the situation was serious and we started a systematic search for the truck. After about 30 minutes, since we seemed to be even more lost than before we agree to each ride opposite directions to two visible high points for a look. Well, let me tell you, those sand dunes are quite confounding; before long we lost each other. Since I couldn’t hear or see my riding partner I started getting really worried. Finally I decided to start a large circular pattern and rode for another fifteen minutes or so and saw nothing even vaguely familiar. Now I was getting really, really worried but what to do? Gas is getting low…oh sh*t! Again I started out with some other plan. No sooner has I started out around a dune that directly ahead was the truck AND my riding partner who was coming from the opposite direction. He also had just spotted the truck. I couldn’t believe my eyes!

[RG500]

I was doing a little off road motorcycle riding in the Colorado Peru Creek mining district, a rather remote area. It was early in December an the weather was quite chilly, cold enough for water to freeze on my boots and motorcycle both, it was rather windy and also snowing lightly all day.
Around 5PM it was starting to get dark so I loaded up my motorcycle and headed back down the only dirt road to the nearest highway which was about 5 miles away. About 1/2 mile into my trip I saw two nuns, their habits blowing in the wind, walking with a Great Dane, I waved and they smiled and waved back. My first thought was "if I don't see them in my rear view mirror I am heading straight for the nearest church" but they were in my mirror and I watched them walk down the road as long as I could keep them in sight.
This wouldn't be too unusual however in the direction they were heading, remember it is almost dark by this time, it is winter windy and well below freezing, they were dressed in nothing more than their habits, there was nothing except a very long walk over a very high mountain pass in front of them. Since I spent the day riding this area I knew there were no cars or trucks, no houses, certainly no churches and no real shelter other than a few remnants of old mining buildings. I did not pass any cars or trucks either moving or parked on my way back down that dirt road.
To this very day I still wonder what that was all about, I guess I should have stopped for a chat...

[Ivan Seeking]

Now that is a strange one. I really wish you had stopped and asked. I will probably always wonder about this...especially since nuns normally can't have dogs. My SWAG is that they were walking the dog for someone locally; perhaps an invalid. There must have been a house somewhere nearby that you missed.

[Shorebreak]

I have a few stories that are interesting with regards to "small world" coincidences.

The first involves my brother. He was spending time in Europe. About six months into his trip he stayed in a B'n'B in Portugal. At the time, although he was enjoyibg his adventures immensely, he was longing for some of the familiarities of home. He got up for breakfast and sat at a community table. The woman facing him was a very close family friend our home town.

The second involves a co-worker. I was working for an international company and our US office was participating in a large convention in Paris. One evening after work we were on foot heading towards our dinner destination when the coworker excused himself from the group and approached a couple on the opposite side of the street. We watched as smiles, handshakes, and hugs were exchanged. After a brief conversation, the co-worker rejoined us and explained that these were his next-door neighbors. Neither were aware of the others travel plans to Paris.

I have more, but time is short - I'll post later.

[Evo]

I've got a couple of stories my mother used to tell of her experiences during WWII in Algiers, Algeria, N Africa. (formerly a French colony)

Her father was a Captain in the French Navy during the war. Her and her step sisters were at home in an upstairs room. No one else was home and no one was expected for quite awhile.

They heard the front door open and heard someone waking across the floor. Then they heard someone open the piano and start to run their hand up and down the keys. Obviously they were a bit frightened, wondering who was in the house and doing this. Finally, one of them got up the courage to go out and look to see who was there and there was no one. The piano was closed, the front door was locked from the inside.

Before long a soldier came to the house telling them that their father had been in an accident, the jeep he had been riding in had crashed and he had been pinned under and was in the hospital, but was in good condition.

When they got to the hospital they told their father about hearing someone come into the house and the piano playing. He asked what time it happened and they said around 3:30pm. He said that was the same time that he had been brought into the hospital and had heard the radio and thought about the piano at home.

Another time her mother & father were sitting in the den and there was an old antique clock sitting on the mantle that had not worked in years. Suddenly the clock started chiming. Her father looked over at her mother and asked her when she had gotten the clock repaired. She said that she hadn't.

A bit later a messenger arrived with news for her father. Her father had let another officer use his quarters to work in on board ship while they were in the harbor because it roomier. The messenger said that a fire had broken out and the officer had been trapped and perished. This happened at approximately the same time as when the clock started chiming.

There are a lot of these odd "coincidences". I wish I could remember all of them.

Even now with my youngest daughter, I've suddenly sensed & even been awoken from a sound sleep knowing that she was trying to phone me and was angry. I often unplug the phone so I am not annoyed and forget to plug it back in. Many of these times as soon as I reached over and plugged the phone in, it would be ringing and she would start yelling at me telling me she'd been calling me a dozen times.

[Ivan Seeking]

I had a strange coincidence occur this morning. For some reason I thought about a guy who had done some work for me in the past - a software engineer who has since moved to New Mexico. Since he moved last year he has emailed me twice, and only in response to specific questions.

This morning, for some reason I was thinking about him and his response when, during his last visit [family visit], I told him about my work with algae as an alternative energy source. He was most enthusiastic and I wondered it he had given it any more thought. A little while later when I checked my email, I had one from him about the new mileage standards for cars that Congress has been considering. As nearly as I can tell, it was sent at almost the exact time that I was thinking about him.

He has no role in the business and I have no idea why I would think of him. Since he moved he is pretty much out of the picture.

Very odd.

[Evo]

I had a strange coincidence occur this morning. For some reason I thought about a guy who had done some work for me in the past - a software engineer who has since moved to New Mexico. Since he moved last year he has emailed me twice, and only in response to specific questions.

This morning, for some reason I was thinking about him and his response when, during his last visit, I told him about my work with algae as an alternative energy source. He was most enthusiastic and I wondered it he had given it any more thought. A little while later when I checked my email, I had one from him about the new mileage standards for cars that Congress has been considering. As nearly as I can tell, it was sent at almost the exact time that I was thinking about him.

He has no role in the business and I have no idea why I would think of him. Since he moved he is pretty much out of the picture.

Very odd.I have the same things happen. I'll suddenly think of a client I haven't spoken to in over a year and the phone will ring and guess who? :bugeye: It happens quite often, so often that I don't know what to think of it.

[siddharth]

Well, whenever something like this happens to me, I think of the number of coincidences that didn't happen.

[Evo]

Well, whenever something like this happens to me, I think of the number of coincidences that didn't happen.I knew you were going to say that! :tongue:

[Tony11235]

These are very interesting events indeed. But look at it this way: you are cherry picking so few events from billions of events, majority of which are not surprising or interesting. I think I basically just repeated what you said siddharth, but I just felt I had to say it.

[russ_watters]

I have the same things happen. I'll suddenly think of a client I haven't spoken to in over a year and the phone will ring and guess who? :bugeye: It happens quite often, so often that I don't know what to think of it. It is a standing joke in my office that if we have a job that is languishing, we just remove it from our list of active jobs. Invariably, the client immediately calls to reactivate the job.

[Evo]

It is a standing joke in my office that if we have a job that is languishing, we just remove it from our list of active jobs. Invariably, the client immediately calls to reactivate the job.Speak of the devil, that just happened 15 minutes ago. I had to give my boss my forecast today, and this customer hadn't returned my calls for 4 months, so I removed it and within an hour he called me and said to go ahead. :bugeye:

Now if I add him back to my forecast, he will disappear again, so I am leaving him off. :uhh:

[Moridin]

I tend to think that it is observation selection on statistical anomalies.

[neutrino]

The TV programme Million2One airs a lot of real-life incidents like some of the above, and in the end calculates the probability of that happening.

There's this old man, somewhere in England. His daughter takes care of him, but for a few hours on a particular day, she goes back to her house, which was just down the street (or somewhere pretty close by). During those fateful hours, the old man has a heart attack. He tries to call his daughter, but by mistake dials the wrong number. But guess what, he dials to a public phone in a quiet corridor in a city hospital. And who was walking by when the phone rang? His granddaughter, who happens to be working as a nurse there! He was eventually brought to the hospital and was saved.

[Ivan Seeking]

Well, whenever something like this happens to me, I think of the number of coincidences that didn't happen.

I once tried to quantify situations like this and generate a probability, but there are often sooooooo many variables that the task was non-trivial to say the least. My position on this is that the most strking accounts it might be explained by statistics, but there are many examples where this is difficult to defend when you lay it all out, and perhaps impossible [or nearly so] to quantify.

I tend to think that events with odds of something like one in a billion happen too often, but, as I said, it was beyond me to develop a model that could test this idea.

[Moonbear]

Let's see, I have explanations for the ones in the quote in the OP:
1) Both sisters were equally bad drivers, so if they both had to head down the same road in opposite directions to get to each other's houses, it's no wonder they collided.

2) Of COURSE she was locked out...her brother had the spare key! We have no idea how often this person locked herself out, and she may have given her brother the spare key she usually leaves hidden outside for these frequent lockouts.

3) Of all the kids in the world who have tied messages to balloons or stuck them in bottles, is it really surprising that there'd be ONE case where they'd wind up in the hands of someone with the same name? I wonder how common the name Buxton is?

I'd have to agree with siddharth that it's just confirmation bias. We tend to notice if something happens, but don't notice all the times nothing happens, or we only meet up with strangers. And, the wider our circle of acquaintances, the more likely we'll bump into them in unexpected places. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to meet up with an old classmate in a town far from home (I wound up living only a town over from one in OH and didn't know it until a mutual friend mentioned he was coming out to visit and was going to visit my other classmate while out there too). People from similar backgrounds are attracted to similar places I think.

[siddharth]

I once tried to quantify situations like this and generate a probability, but there are often sooooooo many variables that the task was non-trivial to say the least. My position on this is that the most strking accounts it might be explained by statistics, but there are many examples where this is difficult to defend when you lay it all out, and perhaps impossible [or nearly so] to quantify.

I tend to think that events with odds of something like one in a billion happen too often, but, as I said, it was beyond me to develop a model that could test this idea.

This is where I found the "law" of truly large numbers illuminating.


The law of truly large numbers says that with a large enough sample many odd coincidences are likely to happen.

For example, you might be in awe of the person who won the lottery twice, thinking that the odds of anyone winning twice are astronomical. The New York Times ran a story about a woman who won the New Jersey lottery twice, calling her chances "1 in 17 trillion." However, statisticians Stephen Samuels and George McCabe of Purdue University calculated the odds of someone winning the lottery twice to be something like1 in 30 for a four month period and better than even odds over a seven year period. Why? Because players don't buy one ticket for each of two lotteries, they buy multiple tickets every week (Diaconis and Mosteller).

Some people find it surprising that there are more than 16 million others on the planet who share their birthday. At a typical football game with 50,000 fans, most fans are likely to share their birthday with about 135 others in attendance. (The notable exception will be those born on February 29. There will only be about 34 fans born on that day.)

You may find it even more astounding that "In a random selection of twenty-three persons there is a 50 percent chance that at least two of them celebrate the same birthdate" (Martin).

On the other hand, you might say that the odds of something happening are a million to one. Such odds might strike you as being so large as to rule out chance or coincidence. However, with over 6 billion people on earth, a million to one shot will occur frequently



Given the fact that there are billions of people and the possible number of meaningful coincidences is millions of billions, it is inevitable that many people will experience some very weird and uncanny coincidences every day.

(http://skepdic.com/lawofnumbers.html)

[Ivan Seeking]

I am well aware of the laws of large numbers, but the fact is, to attribute all such "coincidences" to odds is a faith statement. Unless we have a way to quantify each episode and compare the frequency of such events, we can't know if they are explained by the odds. From a scientific pov we would expect this all to be explained by the laws of very large numbers, but without a model to test this assertion, we are only guessing.

[turbo]

One thing we should consider is the holistic nature of consciousness. I have a friend of 35+ years who lives a thousand miles away. He is in the import-export business, so he is often either out of the country (often in Nepal or Kashmir), or criss-crossing the US with his wife to attend trade shows. He and I have given each other rocks and minerals, native American artifacts, and other objects, and it's natural that when you see these things daily in your house, you connect with the other person a bit, even on an unconscious level. If he calls or emails saying that he and Barb are going to be up to visit his dad and they want to get together with us, I usually think "I was just thinking about him", when in fact, he is probably a frequent low-level stimulant in my mind because of all the connections that we have made over the years. I have pictures that I took when his only child was about 4 and we made an easy hike into a beautiful waterfall, and others when the son was a teen and we climbed Mt. Katahdin with some other friends and family. It's not that I discount the times when these coincidences pop up, but I have to realize that my brain replays a lot of stuff and that sometimes the coincidences are a function of this.

There is a guy that I consider a friend, though he lives on the left coast and I have never met him, and I think of him often. He was a Navy surgeon during the Viet Nam war, and he insisted on accompanying Marines in hot fire-fights, so he could treat their injuries more effectively than just waiting for them to be flown in to a field hospital. He once removed a live mortar round from the abdomen of a Marine (who survived) with his bare hands, and got a Silver Star for that. He should have gotten the Congressional Medal of Honor for that. We haven't hooked up for a couple of years, but if he called tomorrow, I could say with complete honesty "I was just thinking of you earlier". Go to page ten, and get ready to love this guy.

http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps17064/IssueAll10.pdf

[Evo]

Not to mention all the times that I don't think of someone and they call me.

Just last month my ex partner at my former employer called me looking for a job. I hadn't thought about him in almost a year! :tongue2:

When the girls were little I could always tell when their dad (my ex) was calling. We got tons of phone calls, but every time he called, I wouldn't answer and I'd tell them to pick up because it was their dad. I was never wrong and I never accidently answered one of his calls. It got to the point where they asked how I could tell daddy's ring apart from everyone else's. I told them (it's a joke between me and the girls) and they thought it was hysterical. But it was true, the hair on the nap of my neck would rise when he called.

[russ_watters]

I tend to think that events with odds of something like one in a billion happen too often, but, as I said, it was beyond me to develop a model that could test this idea. Every moment of your life is utterly filled with 1 in a billion chances, the vast majority of which go completely unnoticed. I am well aware of the laws of large numbers, but the fact is, to attribute all such "coincidences" to odds is a faith statement. No it isn't! That's what science is! The corollary that you seem to imply is that any sufficiently large sample will contain happenings that are inexplicable by science. That's basically just not accepting the scientific worldview.


[caveat: the way you said it was slanted - scientists don't think exactly that way]

[russ_watters]

Not to mention all the times that I don't think of someone and they call me. Besides the selection bias, most people simply overestimate the rarity of every-day occurrences. In my example, we took, iirc, 3 jobs off our board that day and only got the one call. Jobs that do languish also tend to languish a certain amount of time - 2-4 months, I would guess. And we tend to take them off our board in that amount of time as well. So now the odds are down to something like 13:1 for that day (40 business days in 2 months, 3 clients), which isn't a very big coincidence at all, especially considering we do that probably every other week.

The other night, I found out that a neighbor of mine, her father was one of my profs in college. How big a coincidence is that? The population of the Philly metro area is about 5 million, so is it 5 million to 1? Certainly not - I can probably think of a dozen ways to trim the sample size to reduce the odds. For starters, I probably had 20 profs that fit the demographic - so now it's 1:250,000. But then what fraction of the original sample fit the demographic of middle-aged males? 1/8? And how tight do I make the demographics? - she's Israeli and I probably only had two Israeli profs, but then there are probably also a very small number of Israelis in the Philly area. It becomes impossible to calculate the odds, but you can see how easy it is to make them very reasonable.

And what about all the other possible coincidences that didn't happen - how do we factor those in? What if I had met her in college? Would that be a bigger coincidence? Considering her dad was an engineering prof at my school, she took engineering (for a little while...), and our times at school partially overlapped, it is almost a bigger coincidence that we didn't meet!

[Evo]

Yep, it's like someone remarking on seeing the time 11:11 on the digital clock and thinking that he seemed to be drawn to looking at the clock at that particular time and thought it was significant, when in fact he just remembered the instances of seeing 11:11 or 12:12 etc... because it stood out in his mind because it was interesting, his mind blanked out the other hundreds of glances at the clock because they didn't catch his attention.

How many times have I thought of an old friend and they didn't call? I don't know since it didn't happen there is no event to remember.

But then there are those occurances like my ex's phone calls that were so spot on to make the kids ask how I did that. Probably coincidental, but it became quite funny.

[DaveC426913]

TWO sisters decided to pay a surprise visit to each other. As they travelled in opposite directions along a rural highway in America, their identical jeeps collided and both were killed.

Let's grant that everything in this story is true - evern the dubious things such as a "surprise" visit, and "identical" Jeeps.

Just how coincidental is it?

Paying a surprise visit to each other. Had they just been on the phone, commisurating over thier lousy lives? The point is, it's quite possible that this dual decision was not a coincidence - being sisters, it's highly likely their lives were "entangled", meaning one's affects the other's.


How far apart did they live? 10 miles? They're in the country. How many routes would there be from one house to the other? One?

The accident itself is not too hard to believe "Hey, isn't that my sister coming up? Hey! HEYY!! Hi!" wave wave - screech tires - dirt road - oops.


See, this is really just one event - not two. There isn't any larger picture with mysterious interconnections.

Coincidences are - by definition - not requiring of an explanation. In a world as large as ours, unrelated things at some point, HAVE to come together.


Dave - The Fun Wrecker

[LightbulbSun]

I have no idea if any of these stories are true.



http://www.people.co.uk/news/content_objectid=14051913_method=full_siteid=55768 _headline=-FLUKEY%2DOR%2DSPOOKY%2D-name_page.html

Similar stories?

When I was fifteen, an older friend and I took a 250 [roundtrip] mile bicycle ride from a suburb of Los Angeles to a camping area in the mountains above the town of Hemet. The trip out required about 18 hours of pedaling; much of it either up hill and/or through the desert. Since for a good part of the trip the primary highway was off limits to cyclists, for about eight of the eighteen hours we road along miles and miles of hot, flat, lonely desert roads that were well off the beaten tract. Right about the time I thought we had actually arrived at the middle of nowhere, being about eighty miles from my home and forty miles from any significant population centers, far ahead we noticed a small figure emerging from the blurry heat layer above the road. As we approached what we could then see was a rider on a horse, I finally saw that it was a fellow classmate - a girl from my [current] ninth grade class. It turned out that her family owned land out there and often spent weekends in the desert. She was the only person that we saw for many hours.

This is the one that really gets me. At age sixteen I was a complete off-road motorcycle nut. I often went to a place called El Mirage dry lake bed with one or several friends for some desert biking. The lake bed is surrounded by miles and miles of sand dunes and hills. On one unlucky occasion, while riding with just one other friend we got lost in the dunes. We had no visible points of reference and had gotten completely turned around. Having about one gallon of gasoline left in our tanks and only a little water, and since it was about a hundred degrees out that day…at least, we agreed that the situation was serious and we started a systematic search for the truck. After about 30 minutes, since we seemed to be even more lost than before we agree to each ride opposite directions to two visible high points for a look. Well, let me tell you, those sand dunes are quite confounding; before long we lost each other. Since I couldn’t hear or see my riding partner I started getting really worried. Finally I decided to start a large circular pattern and rode for another fifteen minutes or so and saw nothing even vaguely familiar. Now I was getting really, really worried but what to do? Gas is getting low…oh sh*t! Again I started out with some other plan. No sooner has I started out around a dune that directly ahead was the truck AND my riding partner who was coming from the opposite direction. He also had just spotted the truck. I couldn’t believe my eyes!

Ivan,

This is really a mere coincidence. Identical cars are not that rare considering the fact that I always see a million Hyundai Accents on the road all the time, but I think nothing of it. People forget that this planet is really a small planet, and with so many people on it a lot of flukey things are bound to happen that don't have any significant correlation between them. I have to deal with this a lot and it seems like people find the word 'coincidence' too humdrum and are always seeking some mystical explanation. There's nothing to this.

[Ivan Seeking]

Ivan,

This is really a mere coincidence. Identical cars are not that rare considering the fact that I always see a million Hyundai Accents on the road all the time, but I think nothing of it. People forget that this planet is really a small planet, and with so many people on it a lot of flukey things are bound to happen that don't have any significant correlation between them. I have to deal with this a lot and it seems like people find the word 'coincidence' too humdrum and are always seeking some mystical explanation. There's nothing to this.

What are you talking about?

[DaveC426913]

What are you talking about?
He's saying the same thing I am. He's saying coincidences happen.

And coincidences do not require explanation. They are simply ... coincidences.


Here's an easy one: Flip a coin one million times, record the values. Go through the list of results and find a place where heads came up 10 times in a row. Now write some silly book about this "Is it simply chance, or is there some deeper hidden interconnectedness to the universe?"


Take it one step further: Ten pennies think to themselves "Wow! what are the chances that we ten heads are all together!! That's got to mean something important!!!" And the one hundred to either side of those ten say "Wow! Look what happened right in my neighbourhood! That's got to mean something!"

Meanwhile, there's 999,790 pennies that go on about their boring lives.

[baywax]

I'm just submitting a title here

The Roots of Coincidence by Arthur Koestler

And its on Amazon with 6 reader's reviews

http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Coincidence-Arthur-Koestler/dp/0394719344

Here's a quote about Koestler's work from the New York Times

Mr. Koestler's main concern is with demonstrating that, contrary to what one might expect- namely, that such paranormal events are most disturbing because they seem to break what most of us think are the laws of the real world- it is precisely modern physics that offers a "rapprochement" between the real world and parapsychology, even if the rapprochement is "negative in the sense that the unthinkable phenomena of ESP appear somewhat less preposterous in the light of the unthinkable propositions of physics."

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/01/02/specials/koestler-roots.html

I'll chime in and point out that the word "coincident" simply describes two incidents occuring at the same time. It does not explain why they've happened simultaneously. But, if you think about it, there are about 6 billion "coincidents" taking place right now, amongst the human population and they are not bound by timelines or distances. They are simply happening here (on the planet) and now.

[DaveC426913]

Hospital staff often claim that more babies are born during the Full Moon and that most crime happens during a Full Moon.

I want to ask the staff when is the last time they saw a baby born and looked out the window and said "Wow, another baby born two days past a waning gibbous!"

[Ivan Seeking]

He's saying the same thing I am. He's saying coincidences happen.

I realize that, but the story wasn't referenced accurately. It does no good to ignore the interesting parts a story, or to pick obvious examples, just to make it all easier to explain. Also, we know coincidences happen, but the question is whether or not all cases can be explained by coincidence. And the answer is that they might be, but in many cases we don't have a way to test this assertion.

How would you calculate the odds in the story about the house key?

It is fair to say what we expect - that it is all explained by probability - but it is crackpottery to make a statement as fact when it can't be tested.

[LightbulbSun]

Similar stories?

When I was fifteen, an older friend and I took a 250 [roundtrip] mile bicycle ride from a suburb of Los Angeles to a camping area in the mountains above the town of Hemet. The trip out required about 18 hours of pedaling; much of it either up hill and/or through the desert. Since for a good part of the trip the primary highway was off limits to cyclists, for about eight of the eighteen hours we road along miles and miles of hot, flat, lonely desert roads that were well off the beaten tract. Right about the time I thought we had actually arrived at the middle of nowhere, being about eighty miles from my home and forty miles from any significant population centers, far ahead we noticed a small figure emerging from the blurry heat layer above the road. As we approached what we could then see was a rider on a horse, I finally saw that it was a fellow classmate - a girl from my [current] ninth grade class. It turned out that her family owned land out there and often spent weekends in the desert. She was the only person that we saw for many hours.

Coincidence. You're bound to find someone you know in the same area as you since this planet is so small. What's so magical about a person owning land out there?

This is the one that really gets me. At age sixteen I was a complete off-road motorcycle nut. I often went to a place called El Mirage dry lake bed with one or several friends for some desert biking. The lake bed is surrounded by miles and miles of sand dunes and hills. On one unlucky occasion, while riding with just one other friend we got lost in the dunes. We had no visible points of reference and had gotten completely turned around. Having about one gallon of gasoline left in our tanks and only a little water, and since it was about a hundred degrees out that day…at least, we agreed that the situation was serious and we started a systematic search for the truck. After about 30 minutes, since we seemed to be even more lost than before we agree to each ride opposite directions to two visible high points for a look. Well, let me tell you, those sand dunes are quite confounding; before long we lost each other. Since I couldn’t hear or see my riding partner I started getting really worried. Finally I decided to start a large circular pattern and rode for another fifteen minutes or so and saw nothing even vaguely familiar. Now I was getting really, really worried but what to do? Gas is getting low…oh sh*t! Again I started out with some other plan. No sooner has I started out around a dune that directly ahead was the truck AND my riding partner who was coming from the opposite direction. He also had just spotted the truck. I couldn’t believe my eyes!

There's nothing strange at all about finding the truck at the same time. You guys must of had done a complete 180 and if the truck wasn't there you would of intersected with each other. This is just a coincidence. When someone thinks of the same thing as me at the same time I just think they had a similar train of thought. Nothing magical or mystical about it whatsoever.

[Ivan Seeking]

Coincidence. You're bound to find someone you know in the same area as you since this planet is so small. What's so magical about a person owning land out there?

Well, I don't mean to imply that either of my stories is suggestive of anything other than long odds. In fact the second story was most interesting to me because I was starting to worry about my life, not really because the odds were that great. But try to quantify the situation. In some cases the odds seem extraordinarily long and we would seem to expect that such events are very rare, but even events with long odds can be common.

One quickly realizes that in order to address these situations in a general way, one needs to assign classes of events to help sort things out. Some events that seem highly unlikely are in fact likely due to the number of similar benign events experienced in a typical day or year. But I was surprised to find just how common some types of events might be even though the odds seem very long.

Anyway, I suggested trying to quantify the odds for the story about the key, or for my encounter with my classmate. It often is not so easy to say with any mathematical certainty what the odds would be.

[Ivan Seeking]

It has long been a hobby of mine to dig up interesting stories like these, so I often probe my customers and friends a bit and see if they offer up anything intersting. If you ask people you will find that most have at least one story about something that seemed very odd; so much so that they find it to be a memorable event. At least this is what I have found.

Here is one story that I found to be very interesting because of the source and the nature of the claim. This came from a person who has no interest in paranormal stuff, and he seemed to be quite perplexed about his own story. As nearly as I can recall it goes like this: He was standing in his driveway and noticed that his neighbor across the street was working on his motorcycle. The guy was running his motorcycle with his rear wheel off the ground and spinning, and cleaning the moving drive chain with a rag. In fact this is a common practice for shade-tree mechanics. It is also very dangerous. Randy [my buddy] was watching this, and as he described it, in his mind's eye he saw the chain grab the rag and drag the mechanics hand into the spinning sprocket. According to Randy, he saw this as if was a memory, and he found himself starting to run, almost like an involuntary reflex, while wanting to yell at his neighbor to stop. He swears that after about two or three steps, and just as he started to yell, what he had seen in his mind actually happened, and his neighbor was injured pretty badly.

So, I don't know. Was this some sort of Deja Vu-like event where the event registered twice and left the impression that he saw it before it happened, or was this a legitimate ESP event of some kind, did he cause it by yelling, and/or was it just a coincidence? If it was coincidental, then as the story was told, the odds would have to be tremendously long. Randy claimed that even he had no idea why he reacted as he did - that it was very uncharacterstic of him. Normally he might have mentioned in passing that cleaning a chain like this is a bad idea, and more likely he would never say anything at all, but to jump and run as he did was perplexing even to him.

[small_bang]

Yep, it's like someone remarking on seeing the time 11:11 on the digital clock and thinking that he seemed to be drawn to looking at the clock at that particular time and thought it was significant, when in fact he just remembered the instances of seeing 11:11 or 12:12 etc... because it stood out in his mind because it was interesting, his mind blanked out the other hundreds of glances at the clock because they didn't catch his attention.



Hmmmm, I have a weird 11:11 story.
I started noticing this 11:11 thing and took notice of it but just laughed. This was back in the latter 90's. This went on for at least a couple of years. As far as I knew, this was my own private 'cosmic joke'.

Then, around '99 I found out about this infamous Art Bell radio show and began to tune in, on and off, around the early spring of that year.
My habit was to take a little radio and stick it next to my ear and then I would fall asleep within a half hour into the show..around 1:30 - 2am. I did this one to several times a week, but not necessarily consistantly everyweek. Many weeks would go by when never listened.

Then, the strangest thing happened. That fall, I happen to tuned in again one day the same way I described above. At 4:30am that same morning, I woke up wide awake.
The program was still in progress and my mind began to focus on what was being said.

Remember...as far as I knew, 11:11 was my very own personal and private 'phenomena'.

Art was talking to a caller. The caller was saying something to the effect: " Art... have you heard anything about lots of people saying that they keep seeing some kind of numbers or something like that?"

To which Art Bell replies: "Yes caller, I don't know what it is, but I can tell you that I've been receiving thousands upon thousands of faxes and emails from people ALL SAYING THAT THEY KEEP SEEING THE NUMBER 11:11 !!!!!!!

Well, let me tell you......I FREAKED OUT

No bull..true story. Let me know the statistics on THAT one.

[small_bang]

All of a sudden everybody clams up? Everybody's reading but noone has nothing to say? Thats weird and spooky!

Heres another flukey coincidence. Whats the statistical probability of one person killing each and every thread they post on? hehehehehe

[wolram]

Some time ago a million to one event was thought to be improbable, the population of earth has increased, machines work faster, so now a million to one chance is much more probable even expected, the unexpected is buried in numbers per cycle.

[baywax]

Some time ago a million to one event was thought to be improbable, the population of earth has increased, machines work faster, so now a million to one chance is much more probable even expected, the unexpected is buried in numbers per cycle.

What's the cycle and what's its rate of attrition with regard to chance and improbability? I would imagine it would, to a large degree, rely on the level of efficiency re: the society producing the numbers and the conditions.

Are coincidences dependent on any sort of condition? Is there a cycle of coincidence?

I would suggest that the rate of coincidental occurances only seems to multiply with the reporting, publishing and discussion them. There may be a correlation between population numbers, technological advances and so on but these factors also add to the efficiency/proliferation of reporting, publishing and discussion of events such as "coincidences".

There are some events that are hard to explain such as thinking about someone then running into them within the same hour. This may be something other than coincidence and more of a result of cognitive interpretation of events resulting in a conclusion such as thinking of a friend. I could explain if anyone wants.

[Ivan Seeking]

Please limit all formal explanations to well established science. Our goal is to see if events can be explained with known science; not to posit new theories. Likewise, to say it is all a matter of the odds means nothing without quantification.

[wolram]

Please limit all formal explanations to well established science. Our goal is to see if events can be explained with known science; not to posit new theories. Likewise, to say it is all a matter of the odds means nothing without quantification.


Maths is not scientific? what rules do you want to apply to two bodied to show they will not meet at some point?

[LightbulbSun]

Please limit all formal explanations to well established science. Our goal is to see if events can be explained with known science; not to posit new theories. Likewise, to say it is all a matter of the odds means nothing without quantification.


It really is just the odds. I don't see anything else to this.

[sas3]

I posted this on a different thread a while agao, but thought i would repeat it in this one.

Enjoy the strangeness!

I went to a concert (Moody Blues, Beach Boys, and The Fix) at Alpine Valley. During the Moody Blues I and my X were standing just behind the paid seats and she did not like the people we were around so we moved way up the hill and sat on the grass. Well I was bummed because the Beach Boys were just about to start and I could hardly see the stage. Well just then a couple came up the hill and asked if we would like there tickets, 3rd roll center. They just came to see the Moody Blues. Well we took the tickets and enjoyed the rest of the concert. 12 years later I was divorced and living back in my home town Tichigan Lake, one night I went to the local bar to have a few drinks. I went and played some Moody Blues and Beach Boys on the jukebox and sat down at the bar and the girl next to me started up a conversation about a concert she went to at Alpine Valley. It was the same girl that gave us the tickets. Tichigan Lake is a very small place and she just happens to end up at that bar on that night (she had never been there before) and just happened to start talking to the guy next to her which was me.
I often think back on this and think of all the things that had to occur for this to happen.
Very Strange!

[small_bang]

Yes....when you think of all the things that had to fall in place precisely in order for it all to come together...

I have another one.

I had a client that I performed an ongoing service for (photography) The owners son also worked there. This son had a woman friend who worked in a large graphic design firm. Through this connection I got several jobs from this woman. She was also involved in producing a one-off catalog for my client that I did the photography for.

In the meantime, my client was being solicted by another ad agency to use their services. Eventually they did and hence I became involved with them too. I also have since become friends with one of the partners of this agency and to this day, over15 years later, still work together.

Coincidentally, this person from the agency (I'll call Tom) also went to college with this women friend ( I'll call her Jane) of my clients son and actually knew each other back then.
(OK, its a small world.....nothing weird about that)

Fast forward 3 or 4 years later. In that time I never had contact or even heard from, or about, this woman Jane.
So one day I'm sitting in the office of Tom, discussing some business. Out of the blue I do a total non sequitor and say..." Gee, I wonder what ever happened to Jane.
"Have you ever heard anything from her?"
He tells me "No...nothing." We finish up our business and I go home.

That evening I turn on the tv and start quickly surfing through the channels. As I'm flipping, my brain quickly registers recognition of a face. I stop and tune in. It turns out that the face I recognized is none other than this woman Jane! She was the topic of a segment on one of these lifestyle shows. She was now the photo editor of a fashion magazine.

When I think about the coincidence of all this.....not only the bringing up her name in conversation but that if it I had just been a fraction of a second off in my channel changing.......whew. weird.

[Ivan Seeking]

Maths is not scientific? what rules do you want to apply to two bodied to show they will not meet at some point?

To make blanket statements without any calculations is not scientific. You stated that it is all in the odds. Well then, take one of the more interesting examples and prove that this makes sense by calculating the odds, and then showing how many similar events can be expected [perhaps for a sample population over a given interval of time].

Baywax was talking about something else - a personal theory to explain these sorts of things - and I wasn't sure where he or she was going, so a reminder was posted to avoid going into no man's land.

[Ivan Seeking]

It really is just the odds. I don't see anything else to this.

We already know your opinion, now prove that it makes sense. :biggrin:

[LightbulbSun]

We already know your opinion, now prove that it makes sense. :biggrin:

What exactly do you want the odds on?

[Ivan Seeking]

I suggested the "key story" long ago... of course I know for a fact that my stories are true, and I like the one about meeting my classmate who was riding a horse in the middle of the desert. That was a real shocker! Or, perhaps other members have a favorite. But, to be fair, it would have to seem very unlikely on the face of things.

[LightbulbSun]

I suggested the "key story" long ago... of course I know for a fact that my stories are true, and I like the one about meeting my classmate who was riding a horse in the middle of the desert. That was a real shocker! Or, perhaps other members have a favorite. But, to be fair, it would have to seem very unlikely on the face of things.

Well just remember, even a one in a million chance these days is a very probable ratio. You're going to have to dig up some factual numbers so we can make a better judgment on this.

[Ivan Seeking]

One in a million events are common but only for some types of events.

What would you like to know?

[Integral]

How about meeting someone online, only do discover that you share alma mater, have the same degree, and most amazing the SO get along!

To weird.

:rofl:

[Ivan Seeking]

That is funny. I think there were about 1500 members when I joined. Most of these people were from the U.S., but not all. And I think we had about ten mentors when I joined the staff [including Integral]... does that sound about right? Also, for some strange reason we had four mentors from Oregon!!!

Integral and I met on PF and found that not only did we attend the same school where we both got physics degrees, and consequently that we know or knew many of the same people as we are fairly close in age, but we also live a short distance apart. We struck up a friendship as a result, and considering that most people annoy me, that is saying something! :biggrin:

[LightbulbSun]

One in a million events are common but only for some types of events.

What would you like to know?


The odds of running into someone you know, but haven't seen in about a few decades.

[Ivan Seeking]

Ah, but you are the one asserting that this can all be explained by the odds. The burden of proof is yours to support this assertion with calculations. I will gladly provide details of my encounter with my classmate, but I have no idea what the odds of the event might be.

[Ivan Seeking]

Yesterday I posted this.
From there he went to The Tomorrow Show, which I watched for many years. I remember him talking one night with a comedian and good friend - forget his name - about an evening at an expensive Los Angeles restaurant. After getting exceedingly drunk, they noticed two suits of armor in the lobby. Somehow they managed to get into the armor and started greeting guests with a sword and lance, which nearly got them arrested.
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=178756

A few hours later I ran into town [a small town some miles from here with a pop of about 10,000] and stopped at my favorite mart for milk and such. The adjacent business closed recently and a new one has moved in, but they are still preparing the building. The store only has a few parking stalls, and I was forced to park in front of their neighbors place. As I pulled up to the parking stop, I looked up and through the window saw a full suit of armor, complete with sword. :uhh:

[moose]

On Wednesday I was with a friend leaving his GFs house. We were on our way to a grocery store. We were talking about many things and at one point we started talking about a friend of ours who joined the Air Force back in March. We go into the store, and my friend yells "Oh my god!". I look and there's the air force friend standing there! We haven't talked about this kid for months and the day we mention him happens to be the first day he comes back from Texas. The fact we even saw him was weird. He was only at the store for 10 minutes.

It's also cool when you and a buddy start singing the same song at the same moment out of nowhere. It's happened twice to me where a friend and I have started to sing the same song at the same moment at the same part of the song, without having heard the song for days. It's kinda creepy, but it's possible that there was some noise made by the AC or the fridge which happened to sound like a part of some song. I don't know.

[Far Star]

A number of years ago a man was walking along the road and my first thought was "Someone's going to hit him". He wasn't close enough to the travel lane for concern so it was a little weird to think that. A few minutes later I passed that way again and he'd been hit by a car.

Not quite as spooky as the nuns and dog, though. I've been wondering about that one for days.

[Swatje]

I once met someone from my class 600 miles from where I live.

Now THAT was wierd.

[mgb_phys]

Well just remember, even a one in a million chance these days is a very probable ratio.
I tried to convince an IT manager of this, we had a cluster of 64 machines, each with 16Billion bits of memory and doing 3Billion operations/second.
He couldn't see that we should get random errors occasionally - because "computers don't make mistakes"

[Ivan Seeking]

I had been planning that Tsu and I go for a hot-air balloon ride on Saturday for her birthday. As it turned out we decided to wait as it wasn't a good time to do this. Nonetheless, it was a real eye-opener to wake up to this on Saturday morning.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=50ae170b-a69b-444f-80c4-15655297cb28&k=92642

:surprised

[Burnsys]

This is what happened to me, i work as a software developer, so i have advanced knowledge of computers, i am also a performance freak, and my home computer almost never crashes.
I live with my girlfriend and i have a couple of folders she must never see! (that means if she see those folders the relationships is over!) anyway i am very carfull when opening those, i always close them, they are hidden in the hard disk and has names that don't mean nothing, So one day i forgot to close one of the folders and went to work. A couple of hours after i came back my girlfriend was in the computer and she told me: Look, what is this folder??? Call me lucky, the folder just hang out Explorer.exe!!!!! (it never happened me before) and so it's contents could not be seen.. So i sayd, mmm. it looks like a virus! Restart the PC!!!

[mgb_phys]

i have advanced knowledge of computers.....
my girlfriend...
Now that's a coincidence too far!
I mean, meeting the Loch Ness monster and Elvis in the same motel - ok, but "I have advanced knowledge of computers" and "I have a girlfriend" is just too far fetched.

[Ivan Seeking]

I was reminded of this today: There was a skit on the show "Saturday Night Live", way back with the original crew, in which John Belushi and Gilda Radner [two of the original cast members] were each playing them self, but many years in the future. The set-up was that as the only surviving cast members, now old and gray, together they walked around a graveyard where the rest of the cast was buried, and they reminisced about the good ole days.

Gilda and John were the first two cast members to die.

[Ivan Seeking]

Also, take a look at the strange similarities between Kennedy and Lincoln.
http://www.school-for-champions.com/history/lincolnjfk.htm

[Far Star]

Gilda and John were the first two cast members to die.

Hadn't thought of that. More spooky than fluky.

[bassplayer142]

I have a few stories of things like this. The first one is a number one like many of you had but I feel mine is really significant. First of all the number is 817. Many times I have seen it and showed people to where they think it is kind of funny. I remember driving by a house and seeing it on a mailbox just starring at me. When I bought my used truck I opened the hood and under it near the radiator is 8-17 stamped on there. It wasn't some number that came when the truck was made. It's like a yellows stamp kind of crooked and off centered like someone put it there obviously before I owned it. Next comes a even more unprobable part. My birthday is August 17 which is 8-17. Did I mention that My birth certificate says I was born at 8:17 (pm I think). All these can be proved if someone is interested. I will try to think of more for later

[phlegmy]

my weirdest co-incidence was about billy joel!!

i had a dream (just before waking up) with that billy joel song
"in the middle of the night... etc"
i mentioned it to my mother over breakfast. she was going to give me a lift into town, i cant remember for what.
so halfways to town i turn on the radio and, you guessed it, that exact billy joel song started playing. and it dosn't get much airtime (not sure if i've heard it since). anyway my mother and i were very amused at this!!

now the chances of that happening are remote but well within possibilty but....

we arrived home after about an hour or so and the postman had been. and there was a letter for me, it was from an old school friend i hadnt seen in about 2yrs and the letter started out as a how do you do type letter, he wrote that he'd remembered that i was BIG into music and he thought that i "had what it takes" and to encourage me he included the story of another young musician, which took up more than half the letter, that musician was Billy joel!!! that was the only time i heard from the guy in the last 7 years!

[Huckleberry]

When I was in the navy I was eating lunch on the ship with a friend. He was the weatherman. We had known each other for several months, perhaps a year, but had never talked about our past. Somehow the conversation came to where we were from. He said he was from Pennsylvania. I told him I had lived there for a year when I was a child. Turns out we lived in the same small town. We had a friend in common. They had the same first name. A year or so later I met him again at my friends house while I was visiting for the holidays.

Things like that happened a lot when I was in the military, with enough frequency that they weren't that surprising anymore. The number of people that I interacted with was much greater than it is now. Now I see the same people every day and there doesn't seem to be as many surprising coincidences. When I'm outside of a familiar area or activity I notice these things more.

[Anticitizen]

I have two.

I'm originally from Knoxville, Tennessee.

When I was in sixth grade, my parents decided to do a road trip of the northeastern coast.

We spent two days in Washington, DC.

So I'm in the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, staring blandly at Ross Perot's helicopter, and I look down, and on the other side of the helicopter is one of my schoolmates and friends, also looking at the helicopter. His parents also had decided on a Northern trip for the summer.

I saw him the next day at the Natural History Museum.

I knew from talking to him that he lived only a few blocks away from my house, but I never saw him in my own town before or after that event outside of school. Kinda wacky that the only place I'd see him outside of school would be many hundreds of miles away.

The second is freakier in my mind...

Around 18-19 years old or so, I randomly grew a taste for island music of several flavors - calypso, reggae, mambo, etc.

I was visiting a friend in a nearby city, Oak Ridge (one of the two birthplaces of the atomic bomb) which is about 15 miles away from Knoxville.

We stopped into a thrift store at random.

Well, I started sifting through the vinyl records that one inevitably finds in a thift shop. (I had a turntable at home). I found some "south seas" music records, purchased them, and took them home.

Well, I pull the first record out of its cardboard sleeve, and find that the person that owned the record was the sort of person that puts their name and address on everything. The fact that someone would put their name and address on a vinyl record of generic mambo tunes is unlikely enough, because when are you going to ever lose a freakin' record?

Well, the name was unfamiliar, but the address was MY ADDRESS.

The home where my family lived, and still lives, (in a neighboring city of 250,000+ people!) for over 25 years!

Blew my teenage mind. Against all odds, someone decades prior liked the same obscure sort of music that I liked, in the same obscure (nowadays) medium that I employed (vinyl), that decided to put their name and address on the record, and lived in the home i was pottytrained in and graduated high school in - then gave their vinyl record to a thrift store in a neighboring city where they presumably moved, where I many years later walked in and purchased it.

Don't even know how to approach the odds on that one.

[DHFabian]

I'll go with fluky, considering the international nature of online stuff. I was doing some research this morning on alleged paranormal activities around southern Wisconsin. I came across a 2007 post on this board from "sas3" who mentioned being from Tichigan Lake. I grew up in Tichigan (left in the mid-1970s, and moved to Jefferson Co by way of California...don't ask). The writer mentioned a concert by the Moody Blues (my favorite band since the late 1960s)and this post was written on my birthday (July 12). Coincidences happen.

[DaveC426913]

I'll go with fluky, considering the international nature of online stuff. I was doing some research this morning on alleged paranormal activities around southern Wisconsin. I came across a 2007 post on this board from "sas3" who mentioned being from Tichigan Lake. I grew up in Tichigan (left in the mid-1970s, and moved to Jefferson Co by way of California...don't ask). The writer mentioned a concert by the Moody Blues (my favorite band since the late 1960s)and this post was written on my birthday (July 12). Coincidences happen.

You know what spooky activity I just saw??

I just saw a thread rise from the dead, having been buried for almost three years! Whoa!

:wink:

[GeorginaS]

Yeah, but it works so nicely with the current "Ghost Story" thread.

Oooo was that a coincidence? Or did someone make that happen?

[DHFabian]

Nah, didn't rise from the dead. I just spend enough time wandering through the Internet crypts
(the fun of obscure researches). The point is, you can find an "eerie" chain of coincidence in nearly anything, if you look long enough. There's nothing mystical or spooky about it. It just happens.

[DaveC426913]

The point is, you can find an "eerie" chain of coincidence in nearly anything, if you look long enough. There's nothing mystical or spooky about it. It just happens.

I agree.

I often have to explain that "coincindences happen. And they don't need to be explained; they're coincidences - that's the definition."

[Ivan Seeking]

This is the problem that I see: What are the odds?

Far more often than not, we have no idea what the odds for any particular event might be, so we can only assume that all "coincidences" can be explained as statistical flukes. But we can't state that as a fact. We have no way to test the claim. We have no model by which to make predictions and then test the frequency of such events. If coincidences occur more often than they should, we wouldn't have any way to know.

[zoobyshoe]

I agree.

I often have to explain that "coincindences happen. And they don't need to be explained; they're coincidences - that's the definition."
Remember this next time you see something in a painting that looks like a brain.

[baywax]

I agree.

I often have to explain that "coincindences happen. And they don't need to be explained; they're coincidences - that's the definition."

Actually the definition of coincidence would be two incidences taking place at the same time... which happens all the time.

[Ivan Seeking]

There is no need for language trivia or discussion of the trivial case. We are talking about events that are perceived to be statistically unlikely. The trouble is that we have to define what statistical relationship exists. And then determine how often one would expect a 1:100, or 1:1,000,000 event, or whatever the odds are, to occur.

[Thetom]

The TV programme Million2One airs a lot of real-life incidents like some of the above, and in the end calculates the probability of that happening.

There's this old man, somewhere in England. His daughter takes care of him, but for a few hours on a particular day, she goes back to her house, which was just down the street (or somewhere pretty close by). During those fateful hours, the old man has a heart attack. He tries to call his daughter, but by mistake dials the wrong number. But guess what, he dials to a public phone in a quiet corridor in a city hospital. And who was walking by when the phone rang? His granddaughter, who happens to be working as a nurse there! He was eventually brought to the hospital and was saved.

Wow! That is... uncanny :) What are the odds of that? He was a very fluky guy (or very spooky, depending on your views).

There can't be millions of people on their death-beds all trying to call help and getting the wrong number. Enough so that it becomes probable that one would get the right wrong number at some point. Can there?

[DaveC426913]

Remember this next time you see something in a painting that looks like a brain.

OK, but ten things coming together at the same time and place doesn't really fit coincidence.

[GeorginaS]

There is no need for language trivia or discussion of the trivial case. We are talking about events that are perceived to be statistically unlikely. The trouble is that we have to define what statistical relationship exists. And then determine how often one would expect a 1:100, or 1:1,000,000 event, or whatever the odds are, to occur.

I think that the key word in this is "perceived". Perceived as statistically unlikely. I think that's beginning with the faulty premise that there is a statistical unlikelihood to begin with.

The name of this thread is "incredible real-life coincidences" when, really, I don't think they stretch credulity, but they are awfully darned interesting.

How many individual events happen to every person each and every day? We only pay attention to the ones that have any significance or meaning to us personally because we'd otherwise be overwhelmed with information. Add to that that our brains are designed to perceive patterns and then we also have a tendency to group together supporting ideas that include evidence of that pattern.

A simple one is how many people do we walk past every day? We don't take note of the majority of them nor does it seem remarkable to us that there are other people in public places where we are. But run into someone at Safeway who you haven't seen since high school 30 years ago, and you both attended a high school on the opposite end of the country, and now you have a "what are the chances?" event. It's not a statistical question. You've already been in that store day in and out with hundreds and hundreds of people. Why is running into someone you know less likely than running into all kinds of people you don't know? You don't pay attention to one grouping, but you pay attention to the other grouping.

And I think if we peer too closely at coincidences -- which are, I think, really just regular events we pay attention to rather than not -- we begin wandering into synchronicity and meaning and whatnot. (One especially has to be careful of the "whatnot". It sneaks up on you.)

[QuanticEnigma]

You've already been in that store day in and out with hundreds and hundreds of people. Why is running into someone you know less likely than running into all kinds of people you don't know? You don't pay attention to one grouping, but you pay attention to the other grouping.
The probability of running into someone you know is much higher than running into somebody you haven't seen for 30 years and on the other side of the country, I think it's the latter that's more significant in that situation. This is a pretty trivial point, but the number of people you don't know far outnumbers the number of which you do know, so it would make sense you would pay attention to that minority when you are out. That being said, I don't think you would walk into a store, expecting to see someone from 30 years ago, and from the other side of the country.

[zoobyshoe]

There is no need for language trivia or discussion of the trivial case. We are talking about events that are perceived to be statistically unlikely. The trouble is that we have to define what statistical relationship exists. And then determine how often one would expect a 1:100, or 1:1,000,000 event, or whatever the odds are, to occur.
I brought this up before a few years back, but I guess it bears repeating. Feynman deftly pointed out the irrelevancy of statistical probability to any given event:

"You know, the most amazing thing happened to me tonight. I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won't believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

Any given specific event is statistically extremely improbable. The more specifically you define the event the more true that becomes (that particular license plate on that particular night!). As Georgina pointed out, we only notice the incredible improbability when the specific event has personal significance. The odds of running into a person you haven't seen in 30 years at the store one day are actually about the same as the odds of running into a specific individual you've never encountered before, if only you appreciate how specific that specific individual actually is, and how specific that time and place. Each stranger, each time, each place, is a very specific. Once you pay attention to that, and focus on how specific they are, the odds of you encountering them become less and less probable. We beat unbelievable odds moment by moment, all day long.

As Georgina emphasized, the key word is "perceived". We are pattern-seeking creatures, with a distinct leaning toward giving everything a kind of "pattern test". Very small whiffs of familiarity put us on alert and we test them to see if they fit a pattern we know. By this mechanism, a circle, two dots and an arc are "recognized" as a smiling face: :smile:, when in fact it bears no authentic resemblance to any face in nature. We even accept it rotated 90 degrees, without the circle :) It's a stripped down abstraction that never-the-less works due to our propensity for checking for patterns at many different levels of perception. Certain kinds of specificity take on extraordinary importance. Other kinds, though equally specific, are ignored, discounted.

Calulating the probability of an event ends up being immaterial in determining if it was a coincidence or not. If you define the event according to certain parameters it become statistically impossible that it should ever occur. Define it according to other parameters, and it becomes inevitable that it should occur.

[QuanticEnigma]

As Georgina pointed out, we only notice the incredible improbability when the specific event has personal significance. The odds of running into a person you haven't seen in 30 years at the store one day are actually about the same as the odds of running into a specific individual you've never encountered before, if only you appreciate how specific that specific individual actually is, and how specific that time and place. Each stranger, each time, each place, is a very specific. Once you pay attention to that, and focus on how specific they are, the odds of you encountering them become less and less probable. We beat unbelievable odds moment by moment, all day long.
Thanks for clarifying that, I think I was referring to all strangers, not a particular individual. But maybe a person isn't considered "particular" until you actually acknowledge them. For example, the probably of seeing "a person" in the street is very high, but if you find out his name and then hope to see him again, that probability drastically reduces. So, really, its the probability of finding him again thats low, not the probability of finding him in the first place. Since you've already seen the friend from 30 years ago, the chance of finding them again is very low, whereas the chance of finding a stranger for the first time is very high.

[turbo]

http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1152374&postcount=8

Old post, but still a "wow" moment.

[GeorginaS]

Any given specific event is statistically extremely improbable.

Thank you for all of that, Zooby. You fleshed those thoughts out far more coherently than I did.

[DaveC426913]

"You know, the most amazing thing happened to me tonight. I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won't believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"


The one I've always used (because I invented it) is:

"More babies are born during a full moon than any other time. Just ask any nurse; they'll corroborate it."

To which my response is: when is the last time a nurse, while attending a birth, looked out the window and remarked "Wow, another baby born during a waning gibbous Moon!"?

[zoobyshoe]

Thanks for clarifying that, I think I was referring to all strangers, not a particular individual. But maybe a person isn't considered "particular" until you actually acknowledge them. For example, the probably of seeing "a person" in the street is very high, but if you find out his name and then hope to see him again, that probability drastically reduces. So, really, its the probability of finding him again thats low, not the probability of finding him in the first place. Since you've already seen the friend from 30 years ago, the chance of finding them again is very low, whereas the chance of finding a stranger for the first time is very high.
You're missing Feyman's point. A "friend from 30 years ago" is much more specific than a "stranger", just like the license plate ARW 357 is vastly more specific than just "a license plate." To appreciate how unlikely encountering the stranger is, even for the very first time, you have to define them at least as specifically as the friend from 30 years ago. The stranger has to become something like: A 179 lb. blonde man wearing a leather jacket over a purple t-shirt.

You won't notice how specific that man is under normal circumstances because the specificity of his weighing 179 lbs, being blonde, and wearing a leather jacket over a purple t-shirt all at once means nothing to you. Regardless, it's pretty specific and the odds of you encountering a man that specifically defined are extremely low. Keep your eyes open for the license plate ARW 357, for instance. You'll probably never see it. Yet, on that particular night before his lecture, that's the very license plate Feynman saw. Amazing! What are the odds?

The point is that improbable odds can't be used to support the argument a thing was not coincidental. We only get exited at how specific an event is when the particular specificity happens to mean something to us. In fact, all events are specific, hence: improbable, but we normally don't notice that or care. The odds of finding a particular specificity that happens to be important to us now and then are actually high because we are pattern-seeking creatures, with prodigious memories, and we enthusiastically make connections.

That doesn't mean everything is a coincidence. It just means we can't cite improbable odds in support of non-coincidence. Proving a thing was not a coincidence, if you wanted to try, would have to be done by some other investigative means or logic.

[alt]

The probability of running into someone you know is much higher than running into somebody you haven't seen for 30 years and on the other side of the country, I think it's the latter that's more significant in that situation. This is a pretty trivial point, but the number of people you don't know far outnumbers the number of which you do know, so it would make sense you would pay attention to that minority when you are out. That being said, I don't think you would walk into a store, expecting to see someone from 30 years ago, and from the other side of the country.

Hi all;

I just read this entire thread. Interesting. I would respectfully call most of the incidents mentioned thus far, as coincidence or confirmation bias.

Re the above post;

- Running into someone you hadn't seen for 30 years ? Unremarkable.

- Running into someone you hadn't seen for 30 years, but whom you were clearly thinking about (for the first time in years) 30 seconds ago, or 30 minutes ago ? Very remarkable.

And as Ivan says, what are the odds .. and many deeper questions than that too.

[Borg]

http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1152374&postcount=8

Old post, but still a "wow" moment.

A neighbor of mine had a ferret that I can't remember the name of - I'll call him Bob. Anyway, Bob got away and my neighbor put up flyers around the neighborhood. Several days later he got a call from a local tavern saying that they had his ferret. The name of the place was Bob's Tavern.

[zoobyshoe]

Thank you for all of that, Zooby. You fleshed those thoughts out far more coherently than I did.
Thanks!

[Ivan Seeking]

Calulating the probability of an event ends up being immaterial in determining if it was a coincidence or not.

That is only true if we have no way to determine how often the event [probability] should occur, and to then test for the frequency of that occurence. With a large enough sample, a high confidence in the predictions can be achieved.

If I am traveling across the country and never visit the same place twice, and I keep seeing the same license plate [the same car], I could eventually rule this out as chance with high confidence.

No doubt, the perceived likelihood is often not the same as the statistical likelihood. That is why I chose the word "perceived", and then made the distinction that we need to determine the statistical relationship. However, this does not imply that all "flukey" events are merely perceived to be unlikely. Some truly are unlikely. But, we also expect strange events from time to time because we experience so many events in our lives. And therein lies the problem: In most cases, we have no means of formulating a practical test. However, depending on the case at hand, this can also limit our ability to make definitive statements either way. In some if not most cases, we can't know if events like this occur more often than they should. We can only state what we expect based on known scientific principles.

[zoobyshoe]

With a large enough sample, a high confidence in the predictions can be achieved.
I agree with this completely. In the case of these spooky/flukey stories, though, people usually try to guestimate odds from single occurrences.

[DaveC426913]

- Running into someone you hadn't seen for 30 years ? Unremarkable.

- Running into someone you hadn't seen for 30 years, but whom you were clearly thinking about (for the first time in years) 30 seconds ago, or 30 minutes ago ? Very remarkable.
No. That is a coincidence.

And as Ivan says, what are the odds ..
They are highly unlikely.

But in a complex world, highly unlikely events are inevitable*. :rolleyes:


*See what I did there?

[alt]

No. That is a coincidence.

They are highly unlikely.

But in a complex world, highly unlikely events are inevitable*. :rolleyes:


*See what I did there?

Yes, of course - coincidence.

The event I mentioned could be, probably is, coincidence.

The thing that follows from that, is what are the odds - a very difficult, if not impossible thing to calculate ?

And what if such events happen much more frequently than what one might expect ?

I know that your resposne would be as above, ie, 'in a complex world, highly unlikely events are inevitable' ..

But if such highly unlikely events occur with a high frequency, it does leave one wondering.

[GeorginaS]

Yes, of course - coincidence.

Yes, because that's what those events are called.

And what if such events happen much more frequently than what one might expect ?

Define a reasonable frequency expectation is for such events. Once a month? Twice? Once a year? What are the parametres for those expectations?

But if such highly unlikely events occur with a high frequency, it does leave one wondering.

If you read what's already been written, what makes you say that that event is highly unlikely? Coincidences happen all the time and with great frequency. I'd surmise, then, that they're very likely.

And, then, further, I'd be interested to know what exactly you think it "leave[s] one wondering". What do these normal, every day events leave you wondering?

Also, consider for a moment why it leaves you wondering whatever it leaves you to wonder. To me (and not putting words in your mouth just describing my experience; I'd like to hear yours) when someone says to me, "It makes you wonder" they're telling me that they see some significance in whatever the event or events are. When, really, it's our lizard brains perceiving groupings and patterns, which is a normal function. *There's a physicist and commentator named Robert Park who uses the term "Texas sharpshooter fallacy" to describe the perception of groupings as significant and/or meaningful, and everything that falls outside of support for that pattern simply not being taken into account. Statisticians describe it "like firing all your bullets into the side of a barn and then walking over to the bullet-riddled wall and drawing a bull's eye where it looks best". *

[*Reference: Caveman Logic by Hank Davis Prometheus Books Copyright 2009 pg 97]

[alt]

Yes, because that's what those events are called.



Define a reasonable frequency expectation is for such events. Once a month? Twice? Once a year? What are the parametres for those expectations?



If you read what's already been written, what makes you say that that event is highly unlikely? Coincidences happen all the time and with great frequency. I'd surmise, then, that they're very likely.

And, then, further, I'd be interested to know what exactly you think it "leave[s] one wondering". What do these normal, every day events leave you wondering?

Also, consider for a moment why it leaves you wondering whatever it leaves you to wonder. To me (and not putting words in your mouth just describing my experience; I'd like to hear yours) when someone says to me, "It makes you wonder" they're telling me that they see some significance in whatever the event or events are. When, really, it's our lizard brains perceiving groupings and patterns, which is a normal function. *There's a physicist and commentator named Robert Park who uses the term "Texas sharpshooter fallacy" to describe the perception of groupings as significant and/or meaningful, and everything that falls outside of support for that pattern simply not being taken into account. Statisticians describe it "like firing all your bullets into the side of a barn and then walking over to the bullet-riddled wall and drawing a bull's eye where it looks best". *

[*Reference: Caveman Logic by Hank Davis Prometheus Books Copyright 2009 pg 97]

Hi Georgia - thanks for the reply.

Lets assume that different incidents occur at a frequency of, say, once a week, and that such incidents probability is calculated at, say, 1M to one (as to how such probability might be calculated, I have no idea, but we have to have something to work with).

That would then leave me wondering whether there was a more subtle means of perception that enabled one on those occassions, to, ummm .. involuntarily, glimpse a much broader 'present moment' than one would normally.

PS - I can't seem to get the multi quote function to work on this forum. I click on it but nothing happens. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong ? Thanks.

[GeorginaS]

Hi Georgia - thanks for the reply.

Lets assume that different incidents occur at a frequency of, say, once a week, and that such incidents probability is calculated at, say, 1M to one (as to how such probability might be calculated, I have no idea, but we have to have something to work with).

That would then leave me wondering whether there was a more subtle means of perception that enabled one on those occassions, to, ummm .. involuntarily, glimpse a much broader 'present moment' than one would normally.

PS - I can't seem to get the multi quote function to work on this forum. I click on it but nothing happens. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong ? Thanks.

Last thing first, here's a thread that gives really good instructions about how the multi-quote function works

Multiquote Thread (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=388346)

Can you flesh out your idea about involuntarily, glimpse a much broader 'present moment' than one would normally. I'm not quite getting what you mean.

And I think I need to ask you again -- given the normalcy and pedestrian nature of coincidences -- what would you consider an "unusual rate" of their occurrences?

[alt]

Last thing first, here's a thread that gives really good instructions about how the multi-quote function works

Multiquote Thread (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=388346)

Can you flesh out your idea about involuntarily, glimpse a much broader 'present moment' than one would normally. I'm not quite getting what you mean.

And I think I need to ask you again -- given the normalcy and pedestrian nature of coincidences -- what would you consider an "unusual rate" of their occurrences?

Present moment;
Consider a fly. It's present moment would be much shorter than a humans - I'm speaking from the point of view of perception, not actual time. It might experience one second of time, the way I might experience 10 seconds, or a minute, even. I would view it's furious flight as a blur - it would view it's own as normal. OTOH, It would view me as a mass of slow moving substance that it could run rings around. For practical purposes, therefore, it's present, is much smaller and sharper than mine.

Yet if it could 'plug into' my mentality, it would get a far broader perspective of the world around it, albeit a much slower moving one. Things that it would have hitherto come across as succesive instants by way of it's own perception, it could now witness in one instant, as I would.

By extention, I toy with the idea (toy being the operative word here) that occasionally and involuntarily, a human might attach to a higher present moment - perhaps even has a dormant or vestigial ability to do so.

I'd like to answer the second part of your post more fully, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. Each unlikey event could be presumably, be given a probability factor. If an event has a probability of, say, one in a hundred, and such an event (or similar events) were occuring, say 10 in a hundred, then that would be interesting.

Georgia - this is idle thought experiment on my part. I'm not really trying to convince anyone of anything, nor create a new creed or somthin'

Cheers.

PS, thanks for the multi post link. I'll be checking ot out.

[Ivan Seeking]

That is a coincidence.

Prove it. Show that this only happens as often as we would expect.

[jreelawg]

One day while I was in College, I woke up in the morning and started my one mile walk to school for an early morning critical thinking class. A ten dollar bill blew onto the sidewalk right it front of me. I picked it up, and on the way, I put it on the ledge where the kids in the elementary school hang out after school waiting for their parents.

Then in beginning of my class, the teacher asked us what we would do if we bought something at the store, and they gave us $10.00 extra in change.

I don't know how strange of a coincidence it really was, but at the time I thought it was kind of mysterious.

[Mu naught]

One day while I was in College, I woke up in the morning and started my one mile walk to school for an early morning critical thinking class. A ten dollar bill blew onto the sidewalk right it front of me. I picked it up, and on the way, I put it on the ledge where the kids in the elementary school hang out after school waiting for their parents.

Then in beginning of my class, the teacher asked us what we would do if we bought something at the store, and they gave us $10.00 extra in change.

I don't know how strange of a coincidence it really was, but at the time I thought it was kind of mysterious.

What does that question have to do with critical thinking? I'd keep that 10 dollars by the way unless it was a small mom and pop store.

[DaveC426913]

Prove it. Show that this only happens as often as we would expect.

No. That's the point of a coincidence. Two events occurring coincidentally does not require odds.

I fly to Singapore and, while on the beach, run into my ex-girlfriend. This is just an event.

I was thinking about her. This is just an event.

These two events occurring on the same day. That is the coincidence. No matter what the odds are, coincidences occur.

[alt]

No. That's the point of a coincidence. Two events occurring coincidentally does not require odds.

I fly to Singapore and, while on the beach, run into my ex-girlfriend. This is just an event.

I was thinking about her. This is just an event.

These two events occurring on the same day. That is the coincidence. No matter what the odds are, coincidences occur.

Yes, but if the frequency of occurance is higher than what the odds (if calculated accurately) suggest it should be ?

Is is then not interesting to ask why, and if there is any other influence at play ?

[Ivan Seeking]

Yes, but if the frequency of occurance is higher than what the odds (if calculated accurately) suggest it should be ?

Is is then not interesting to ask why, and if there is any other influence at play ?

That is the point. Even if there is a genuine signal buried beneath the noise, we have never devised a test that could provide evidence confirming [or refuting] the claim.

We have no scientific evidence supporting claims of precognition. But we can only say that no one has been able to produce evidence for it on demand. This does not logically exclude the possibility that the proper test has never been devised. Perhaps it cannot be produced "on demand", and only occurs in unique situations - the parameters required for success being undetermined at this time. In much the same sense, most scientific experiments require the correct conditions for success.

So while we can say that we expect that all claims of precognition are really just coincidence - a logical expectation based on the odds of such events - and while we don't know of any physical explanation that could account for claims of precognition, we cannot say that we have good evidence showing [that we know for a fact] that all claims can be dismissed as coincidence. We don't know that these events only happen as often as we would expect.

The difference between saying, "we know", and "we expect", is the difference between philosophy, and emperical science.

[DaveC426913]

Yes, but if the frequency of occurance is higher than what the odds
The frequency of occurrence is once.

If you are talking about multiple occurrences then you are making an association between this coincidence and some other event(s), and then you'll have to show that there's a correlation.

Asking the frequency of occurence of a coincidental event is kind of like asking what the wavelength of a rogue wave is.

[GeorginaS]

And, alt, you still haven't addressed this idea for me. Even if you're talking about the frequency of coincidences in general happening (as opposed to the specific events that they are ie: a chain of specific events called coincidences) how frequent is more frequent than anticipated? You seem to believe or think or feel that there is some rate or number that is represented by the word "unusual". I'd like to know what the threshold is for "unusual rate".

If I experience four coincidences a day, is that a sufficient number to qualify for "a high rate of frequency?" If so, why?

[Ivan Seeking]

The frequency of occurrence is once.

How many people are there in the world? How many have experiences like this, and how often? What are the odds of any event? How often should events like this occur based on the odds? Do we see a siginficant difference between our expectations and the results? One can even calculate the expected margin of error based on the size of the sample.

If you are talking about multiple occurrences then you are making an association between this coincidence and some other event(s), and then you'll have to show that there's a correlation.

You would have to compare similar events given a reasonable definition of what we mean by similar events. For example, one could in principle test to see how often people think of someone just before [within five minutes, for example] they call on the telephone. Then one could in principle calculate the odds to see how often that should happen, and compare the two. The problem is that it would be incredibly difficult to design a proper test that would be practical.

Asking the frequency of occurence of a coincidental event is kind of like asking what the wavelength of a rogue wave is.

No, it isn't. And your statement makes no sense.

This is what the PEAR group was doing for all of those years. They were looking for deviations from what we expect statistically, due to "psychic" or so-called "psi" influences, for events that should be random. While they claim to have found some deviations from the expected results, the deviations are allegedly only evident using meta-analysis. Apparently, for that reason, the results are not generally accepted. If they had found siginficant deviations from the statistical expectations, it would be strongly suggestive of an underlying mechanism for the results, as opposed to random chance, and assuming that the results could be duplicated generally.
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

[Ivan Seeking]

If I experience four coincidences a day, is that a sufficient number to qualify for "a high rate of frequency?" If so, why?

This cannot be answered in isolation. You would have to give a specific example of the type of events that you mean. From there, in principle your answer could be calculated.

[Ivan Seeking]

Let's make it real simple. Obviously there is some chance that I can predict which card I will randomly select from a deck of playing cards - 1:52. I can make a prediction, select a card, and see if my prediction matches the results. We would expect that every once in a while, after every 52 tries, on the average, I will get it right. But, if I could do this every single time - if I guessed every card correctly - would you still claim it is chance? How about every other card? How about every fifth card? There is a reasonable expectation that once in awhile I will get it right. But if I get it right every time or within some limit, or even if I only get it right on 1:51 tries, or 1:51.9 tries, eventually we can rule out chance with high confidence, based on the number of trials.

I may even get lucky and guess every card correctly for some finite number of trials. But if my luck is nothing but chance, as we do more and more trials, my average success rate should approach a value of 1:52, exactly. If this wasn't true, we wouldn't have Las Vegas. In the end, given enough non-psychic customers, :biggrin:, the house always wins. And we know this with high confidence, by the odds, and by the size of the sample. If a significant percentage of gamblers were able to use psychic abilities, to enhance their odds of winning to a significant degree, eventually this would be evident in the average house winnings over time, and Vegas would have a problem.

It also important to remember that, just as with Vegas, our card test doesn't require that we use the same person for each trial. We can use a different person for each trial, but the results should be the same. This is why we could in principle test for "coincidence" for large numbers of people that each only have a few, or one relevant experience. It doesn't require that only one person has many experiences that could be tested. If large numbers of people have similar experiences, assuming that we can properly define what we mean by "similar experiences" and then design a good test, in principle we could check to see if chance is sufficient to explain the experiences, or not, to a level of confidence determined by the sample size.

[alt]

The frequency of occurrence is once.

Yes, the frequency of occurance of any event is once - once it occurs

If you are talking about multiple occurrences then you are making an association between this coincidence and some other event(s), and then you'll have to show that there's a correlation.

Hopefully, my reply to Georgia, following, might answer this.

Asking the frequency of occurence of a coincidental event is kind of like asking what the wavelength of a rogue wave is.

Well, if a rogue wave occured frequently, I sure would want to know it's length :-)

[alt]

And, alt, you still haven't addressed this idea for me. Even if you're talking about the frequency of coincidences in general happening (as opposed to the specific events that they are ie: a chain of specific events called coincidences) how frequent is more frequent than anticipated?

An event with a 50% probability, would, should, obviously occur more frequently than one with a 10% probability.

You seem to believe or think or feel that there is some rate or number that is represented by the word "unusual". I'd like to know what the threshold is for "unusual rate".

See below.

If I experience four coincidences a day, is that a sufficient number to qualify for "a high rate of frequency?" If so, why?

If those events had a probability factor of, say, 50%+, I wouldn't get exited.

If OTOH each event, though unrelated, had a probability factor of, say 10%, and you had four a day to use your example, I reckon there's reason for enquiry.

I am of course, talking about information, ie, knowing something prior to it occuring.

I'm not saying that seeing, for instance, nine red cars and only one blue one, is anomalous.

The thing that needs to be considered, is whether it is possible to determine the probability factor of seeing someone after 30 years, whilst he just came into your mind 30 minures ago (to go back to my original example).

The UNIQUE thing here IS NOT that you saw him after 30 years, it is that you thought about him 30 minutes before you saw him. Even that, on it's own, may be no big deal.

BUT, if such events occured to you persistently, events whose odds of occuring might well be calculated at 100,00 :1 (purely a guess on my part, for the purpose of the arguement), then I do beleive it is something to wonder about.

To wonder whether there is a more subtle, unknown and involuntary mode of perception.

[zoobyshoe]

The thing that needs to be considered, is whether it is possible to determine the probability factor of seeing someone after 30 years, whilst he just came into your mind 30 minures ago (to go back to my original example).

The UNIQUE thing here IS NOT that you saw him after 30 years, it is that you thought about him 30 minutes before you saw him. Even that, on it's own, may be no big deal.

I brought this up before a few posts back, but I guess it bears repeating. Feynman deftly pointed out the irrelevancy of statistical probability to any given event:

"You know, the most amazing thing happened to me tonight. I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won't believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

Any given specific event is statistically extremely improbable. The more specifically you define the event the more true that becomes (that particular license plate on that particular night!). ("And", we can put words in Feynman's mouth here, in response to the specificity of your example, "I was just thinking about those letters and numbers 30 minutes before!")

Calulating the probability of an event ends up being immaterial in determining if it was a coincidence or not. If you define the event according to certain parameters it become statistically impossible that it should ever occur. Define it according to other parameters, and it becomes inevitable that it should occur.

If you suspect an individual event is not coincidental you have to investigate by some means other than calculating it's odds of occurrence. It may well not be a coincidence, but the odds against it are not what proves that: "Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

The added specificity of "I was just thinking about (put specific thing here) 30 minutes before," seems to make the odds against coincidence airtight. However, it's actually just once more specificity. We give that particular kind of specificity disproportionately huge weight because it seems to make the whole thing extremely personal.

[zoobyshoe]

If this wasn't true, we wouldn't have Las Vegas.
In Vegas the house does not get suspicious about a customer who beats the odds once. They only get nervous when they collect a good enough sample to demonstrate he's repeatedly winning more often than he should. Then they start scrutinizing him for cheating somehow.

Each flukey/spooky story is one of the odds being defied once. That means nothing because because the odds against any specific event are huge.

[Ivan Seeking]

In Vegas the house does not get suspicious about a customer who beats the odds once. They only get nervous when they collect a good enough sample to demonstrate he's repeatedly winning more often than he should. Then they start scrutinizing him for cheating somehow.

Each flukey/spooky story is one of the odds being defied once. That means nothing because because the odds against any specific event are huge.

Did you bother to read the example that I gave.

I am not citing this information as a matter of opinion. It is a fact.

Note to all: Continued objections to this will qualify as crackpottery. If you still don't understand, then take a statistics class.

[Noja888]

Cool Topic!

I have wondered upon this concept myself many times Ivan. Some of the stories described here are similar to experiences my Wife and I share.

"Flukey? -or- Spooky?" Some ideas I have had are:

[edit by Ivan]

This would be tricky (and fun) to come up with some sort of experiment to test this. I think it would be hard to test due to (and only in my opinion) a quantum element or hidden variable in the process. :cool:

[Ivan Seeking]

Cool Topic!

I have wondered upon this concept myself many times Ivan. Some of the stories described here are similar to experiences my Wife and I share...

"Flukey? -or- Spooky?" Some ideas I have had are:This would be tricky (and fun) to come up with some sort of experiment to test this. I think it would be hard to test due to (and only in my opinion) a quantum element or hidden variable in the process. :cool:

Thanks. :smile: Please note that you are free to share your stories, but we don't discuss theories. That would only be appropriate if we had published papers documenting the claims, and a formal theory.

[GeorginaS]

Let's make it real simple. Obviously there is some chance that I can predict which card I will randomly select from a deck of playing cards - 1:52. I can make a prediction, select a card, and see if my prediction matches the results. We would expect that every once in a while, after every 52 tries, on the average, I will get it right. But, if I could do this every single time - if I guessed every card correctly - would you still claim it is chance? How about every other card? How about every fifth card? There is a reasonable expectation that once in awhile I will get it right. But if I get it right every time or within some limit, or even if I only get it right on 1:51 tries, or 1:51.9 tries, eventually we can rule out chance with high confidence, based on the number of trials.

I may even get lucky and guess every card correctly for some finite number of trials. But if my luck is nothing but chance, as we do more and more trials, my average success rate should approach a value of 1:52, exactly. If this wasn't true, we wouldn't have Las Vegas. In the end, given enough non-psychic customers, :biggrin:, the house always wins. And we know this with high confidence, by the odds, and by the size of the sample. If a significant percentage of gamblers were able to use psychic abilities, to enhance their odds of winning to a significant degree, eventually this would be evident in the average house winnings over time, and Vegas would have a problem.

It also important to remember that, just as with Vegas, our card test doesn't require that we use the same person for each trial. We can use a different person for each trial, but the results should be the same. This is why we could in principle test for "coincidence" for large numbers of people that each only have a few, or one relevant experience. It doesn't require that only one person has many experiences that could be tested. If large numbers of people have similar experiences, assuming that we can properly define what we mean by "similar experiences" and then design a good test, in principle we could check to see if chance is sufficient to explain the experiences, or not, to a level of confidence determined by the sample size.

Did you bother to read the example that I gave.

I am not citing this information as a matter of opinion. If is a fact.

Note to all: Continued objections to this will qualify as crackpottery. If you still don't understand, then take a statistics class.

Just to be entirely clear, because I'm a bit confused, here, are you saying, Ivan, that we have to confine our discussion vis the perceptions of the importance or significance of coincidences to this statistical example involving cards?

[Ivan Seeking]

Just to be entirely clear, because I'm a bit confused, here, are you saying, Ivan, that we have to confine our discussion vis the perceptions of the importance or significance of coincidences to this statistical example involving cards?

What I am saying is that while perhaps not practical, in principle we can use statistical analysis, and a properly designed test, to see if there are statistical aberrations in the occurrance [frequency] of events that should be random. But we can't discuss this in general terms. Specific examples have to be given in order to determine the relevance.

I gave the one example of thinking of someone less than five minutes before they call. Obviously there is some chance that this will happen from time to time. It would be incredibly difficult if not impossible to design and implement a good test for this, but, in principle, that number could be calculated, and the expected frequency of these events predicted, and compared to the measured frequency.

[alt]

I brought this up before a few posts back, but I guess it bears repeating. Feynman deftly pointed out the irrelevancy of statistical probability to any given event:

"You know, the most amazing thing happened to me tonight. I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won't believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

Any given specific event is statistically extremely improbable. The more specifically you define the event the more true that becomes (that particular license plate on that particular night!). ("And", we can put words in Feynman's mouth here, in response to the specificity of your example, "I was just thinking about those letters and numbers 30 minutes before!")

Calulating the probability of an event ends up being immaterial in determining if it was a coincidence or not. If you define the event according to certain parameters it become statistically impossible that it should ever occur. Define it according to other parameters, and it becomes inevitable that it should occur.

If you suspect an individual event is not coincidental you have to investigate by some means other than calculating it's odds of occurrence. It may well not be a coincidence, but the odds against it are not what proves that: "Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

The added specificity of "I was just thinking about (put specific thing here) 30 minutes before," seems to make the odds against coincidence airtight. However, it's actually just once more specificity. We give that particular kind of specificity disproportionately huge weight because it seems to make the whole thing extremely personal.

I don't mean to get bogged down in repeating the argument in different ways, but IMO, there is a HUGE difference in;

- seeing licence plate ARW 357, and saying "what are the chances of seeing that ?", and

- seeing licence plate ARW 357 and realising you had thought of it, or it had come to mind somehow, a little earlier.

These two events are very different things, IMO.

[alt]

What I am saying is that while perhaps not practical, in principle we can use statistical analysis, and a properly designed test, to see if there are statistical aberrations in the occurrance [frequency] of events that should be random. But we can't discuss this in general terms. Specific examples have to be given in order to determine the relevance.

I gave the one example of thinking of someone less than five minutes before they call. Obviously there is some chance that this will happen from time to time. It would be incredibly difficult if not impossible to design and implement a good test for this, but, in principle, that number could be calculated, and the expected frequency of these events predicted, and compared to the measured frequency.

I agree. Calculating the probability would be an incredibly difficult thing - even for a statistician.

I wonder if anyone has any idea of how to go about it.

[Noja888]

My apologies Ivan. My mind starts running sometimes.

[Ivan Seeking]

- seeing licence plate ARW 357, and saying "what are the chances of seeing that ?", and

Still, in principle we could test for this as well, but it gets messy. In fact, unless we assume that one or both drivers are following random routes, the odds of seeing a particular plate may not be incredibly low. Each driver typically has a home base, a daily route, and a destination [such as the location of their jobs], and they follow these routes according to predetermined schedules. It may be a near certainty that I will see a particular plate at least once over a period of one year. On the other hand, if our paths never cross because we live in different States, then the odds of seeing a particular plate may be zero. And this is why any analysis of this nature is usually a practical impossibility, or seemingly so. The amount of information required for each person could not only be large, but also subjective, or indeterminate.

How often might I think of a particular license plate just before I see it? Good luck! For that matter, how often might one think of the concept of a license plate, and not just one particular plate? I have no idea how one could address that question. This would in part be a function of our daily lives. I may see an interesting custom plate, or a sequence of numbers, that make me think of Bob’s license plate, just before I see Bob driving down the street. But we have no way to predict these sorts of random associations that influence our thinking - we would have to predict how often those things might happen, and how often they are likely to influence our thinking... It is a black hole. At most, one might determine some limits by doing things like considering the maximum number of thoughts that a person can have in a lifetime.

[Noja888]

Hmmm... yes the metrics in such an experiment would be tricky. Much of the information would be on a subjective level which could be categorized and quantified into a sort of objective statement. (Providing we set a standard to consider at what point does the subjective indications become real data).

Also by performing measurements in this 'experiment' the 'system' being measured would be disturbed in some fashion. Would we force the experimentee' to have more coincidences than would be? How would we measure the base test/placebo group? That would be even more difficult to conduct. I'll try to think of some ideas to post.

[Ivan Seeking]

I was talking with a factory engineer the other day. After a bit of discussion, we realized that we are about the same age. We grew up near each other and both went to private religious schools. He has the same name as a guy that was in my class in the private school, but he's no relation. We both went on to get physics degrees. After graduating, we both went to work in not only the same field, but for the same two companies, and in the same order! [As he was telling me his history my jaw about hit the table] Right now, he lives about a half mile from an apartment that my first finacee and I had.

[jreelawg]

What about that myth about the number 23 and 32? Just for fun after watching the movie 23, me and my friends started checking to see if we could find any 23's and 32's. The month and day of my birthday add up to 32. The digits in my birth year add up to 23. So my birthdate is decoded as 32 23. My drivers license number ends in 23. All the letters in my name converted to their number place in the alphabet added together including my middle name=213. At the time was watching the movie, I was 23 years old. I graduated from high school in 2003. I had a combination lock, in which the combo was randomly 23-32-2. I know it doesn't mean anything, but it was fun at the time, after watching the movie thinking up all the coincidences.

[DaveC426913]

The month and day of my birthday add up to 32. The digits in my birth year add up to 23.

This is Numerology. And it's even sillier than Astrology (didn't think that was possible).

The associations are arbitrary, and a numerologist will just keep looking for the number until they find it.

What do the digits of the month and day of your birthday add up to? Nothing I'll bet.

If your birth year didn't add up to 23, you'd* look at just the last 2 digits of it. Or if it wasn't 23, you'd accept 32.

Keep trying combinations of adding whole numbers and digits, and then various permutations of operators, until one result comes back with the number you seek.


*not you you, of course. I mean some you that takes this seriously.

[baywax]

You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember.

Is this what is termed "coincidence"?

Is it some influence that is electromagnetic in nature (re: "thinking of")

Is it part of some "pre-cognitive" ability? or "intuition"?

Are there any studies that debunk the idea that this is a pre-cognitive awareness of events about to take place in the future?

And what does the word "coincidence" describe with regard to cases like this, other than the fact that 2 or more incidents take place at one time.

[baywax]

I was talking with a factory engineer the other day. After a bit of discussion, we realized that we are about the same age. We grew up near each other and both went to private religious schools. He has the same name as a guy that was in my class in the private school, but he's no relation. We both went on to get physics degrees. After graduating, we both went to work in not only the same field, but for the same two companies, and in the same order! [As he was telling me his history my jaw about hit the table] Right now, he lives about a half mile from an apartment that my first finacee and I had.

That's a parallel life situation Ivan. The odds of it happening under the conditions you describe are probably pretty high.

edit, ie... the odds of parallel lives coming out of West Point Academy are huge... coming out of a private, highly structured school... the odds are not as high but still pretty up there.

[DaveC426913]

You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember.

Is this what is termed "coincidence"?
Yes. Compare to the countless times you have thought of someone and they have not shown up.

And what does the word "coincidence" describe with regard to cases like this, other than the fact that 2 or more incidents take place at one time.
A coincidence, by definition, does not require an explanation. It is quite simply: two things, otherwise unrelated, happening at the same time.

[Ivan Seeking]

Yes.

Prove it.

[DaveC426913]

Prove it.

Don't need to. Null hypothesis. The onus is on him/you to show there is a connection - that it is not a coincidence.

You would need to show that, of all the times the subject has thought of some person, there is a statistically significant number where that person subsequently showed up.

[Ivan Seeking]

Don't need to. Null hypothesis. The onus is on him/you to show there is a connection - that it is not a coincidence.

You would need to show that, of all the times the subject has thought of some person, there is a statistically significant number where that person subsequently showed up.


I don't need to show anything. I'm not claiming that precognition happens. I'm saying that you have no experimental data falsifying the claim. You cite statistical expectations with no experimental data to confirm your claim. Put another way, I am skeptical of your assertion. Show me the evidence.

We expect that accounts of seeming precognition can be explained as chance, but to show that it only happens as often as chance would allow is a tall order - we don't know that for a fact. It is true that we have no scientific expectations otherwise.

You are the one who made the definitive statement, not me. You are the one who carries the burden of proof. It is one thing to say what we expect or have evidence to support. It is quite another to state assumptions as facts. We assume the null hypothesis until evidence is produced otherwise, but it is still an assumption.

[DaveC426913]

You are the one who made the definitive statement, not me. You are the one who carries the burden of proof.

No. baywax (or the royal you, as it were) said :

"You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

There is an implicit assertion that there is phenomenon some there worth examining. There is the implicit assertion that something occurring five times over one's life is statistically significant.


Fine then, we'll take it slower. Let's roll back to baywax's post:

He: "You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

Me: "That's nice. I've seen yellow firetrucks 5 times in my life. Why are you telling us this?"

Your move Ivan/baywax.

[nismaratwork]

No. baywax (or the royal you, as it were) said :

"You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

There is an implicit assertion that there is phenomenon some there worth examining. There is the implicit assertion that something occurring five times over one's life is statistically significant.


Fine then, we'll take it slower. Let's roll back to baywax's post:

He: "You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

Me: "That's nice. I've seen yellow firetrucks 5 times in my life. Why are you telling us this?"

Your move Ivan/baywax.

In other words, ARW 357.

[baywax]

No. baywax (or the royal you, as it were) said :

"You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

There is an implicit assertion that there is phenomenon some there worth examining. There is the implicit assertion that something occurring five times over one's life is statistically significant.


Fine then, we'll take it slower. Let's roll back to baywax's post:

He: "You may have experienced the phenomenon where you think of a person and the next moment or at the same moment they call you on the phone or you see them on the street. It has happened to me about 5 times in as I remember."

Me: "That's nice. I've seen yellow firetrucks 5 times in my life. Why are you telling us this?"

Your move Ivan/baywax.

Let me revisit my assertion... first of all, my claim of "5 times" having a thought of someone and having them show up simultaneously is a guess and completely non-statistical with regard to any proper, empirical studies of the incidents. The number may actually be higher... but, of course, as Dave points out, the number of times I've thought of someone... say, Cindy Crawford or Lady Gaga, dead mom or dead dad and they haven't shown up is much higher by comparison.

But do these two conflicting statistics tell us anything useful concerning pre-cognitive activity in the brain? For instance, the conditions surrounding each incident are usually going to be very different.

There would have to be a controlled study to weed out the variables in these cases to actually prove that a pre-cog event is taking place. Right now, however, as Dave points out, the number of times I think of a person and the number of times they seem to appear magically out of the telephone or elsewhere statistically points to coincidence with no known cause or motive other than random simultaneousness.

[DaveC426913]

Let me revisit my assertion... first of all, my claim of "5 times" having a thought of someone and having them show up simultaneously is a guess and completely non-statistical with regard to any proper, empirical studies of the incidents. The number may actually be higher... but, of course, as Dave points out, the number of times I've thought of someone... say, Cindy Crawford or Lady Gaga, dead mom or dead dad and they haven't shown up is much higher by comparison.

But do these two conflicting statistics tell us anything useful concerning pre-cognitive activity in the brain? For instance, the conditions surrounding each incident are usually going to be very different.

There would have to be a controlled study to weed out the variables in these cases to actually prove that a pre-cog event is taking place. Right now, however, as Dave points out, the number of times I think of a person and the number of times they seem to appear magically out of the telephone or elsewhere statistically points to coincidence with no known cause or motive other than random simultaneousness.
:wink:

[baywax]

:wink:

To further explore the implications of coincidence, seriality and synchronicity one might want to look at Chaos Theory since it does appear that coincidence has the same random chance of occurring as any "incident" or event.

Chaotic behavior can be observed in many natural systems, such as the weather (or appearances of subjects at the same time as thinking of them).[4] Explanation of such behavior may be sought through analysis of a chaotic mathematical model, or through analytical techniques such as recurrence plots and Poincaré maps..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory

Here's a map of leylines showing non-causal alignments that occur naturally in a group of stats.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Leylines.png

Alignments of random points, as shown by statistics, can be found when a large number of random points are marked on a bounded flat surface. This might be used to show that ley lines exist due to chance alone (as opposed to supernatural or anthropological explanations).
Computer simulations show that random points on a plane tend to form alignments similar to those found by ley hunters, also suggesting that ley lines may be generated by chance. This phenomenon occurs regardless of whether the points are generated pseudo-randomly by computer, or from data sets of mundane features such as pizza restaurants. It is easy to find alignments of 4 to 8 points in reasonably small data sets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coincidence

Interesting history of the study of coincidence and a theory of "Seriality" and synchronicity.

A coincidence lacks a definite causal connection. Any given set of coincidences may be just a form of synchronicity, that being the experience of events which are causally unrelated, and yet their occurring together carries meaning to the person observing the events. (In order to count as synchronicity, the events should be unlikely to occur together by chance.)
The Jung-Pauli theory of "synchronicity", conceived by a physicist and a psychologist, both eminent in their fields, represents perhaps the most radical departure from the world-view of mechanistic science in our time. Yet they had a precursor, whose ideas had a considerable influence on Jung: the Austrian biologist Paul Kammerer, a wild genius who committed suicide in 1926, at the age of forty-five.
—Arthur Koestler[3]
One of Kammerer's passions was collecting coincidences. He published a book with the title Das Gesetz der Serie (The Law of the Series; never translated into English) in which he recounted 100 or so anecdotes of coincidences that had led him to formulate his theory of Seriality.
He postulated that all events are connected by waves of seriality. These unknown forces would cause what we would perceive as just the peaks, or groupings and coincidences. Kammerer was known to, for example, make notes in public parks of what numbers of people were passing by, how many carried umbrellas, etc. Albert Einstein called the idea of Seriality "Interesting, and by no means absurd",[citation needed] while Carl Jung drew upon Kammerer's work in his essay Synchronicity.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coincidence

[DaveC426913]

Ivan, I haven't heard you chime in.

Do you acknowledge that, per baywax's original account about his coincidences, he has not made the case that there is any anomaly to investigate?

[nismaratwork]

To further explore the implications of coincidence, seriality and synchronicity one might want to look at Chaos Theory since it does appear that coincidence has the same random chance of occurring as any "incident" or event.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory

Here's a map of leylines showing non-causal alignments that occur naturally in a group of stats.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Leylines.png



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coincidence

Interesting history of the study of coincidence and a theory of "Seriality" and synchronicity.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coincidence

Well, that does make a lot more sense than what I thought you were saying! btw, thanks for the chaos theory link, I haven't revisited that in far too long.

[Borg]

I thought that I would relate an odd coincidence that occurred yesterday. My wife and I were walking about a mile from our house when I noticed a house that had water spraying from an outside pipe. We went around to the front door to let them know what was going on. Nobody answered the door so we knocked on the neighbor's door to let them know. The neighbor turned out to be the ex-husband of the woman who lives across the street from us. I understand that the goal of the thread may be to debunk this stuff but that was weird.

[baywax]

I thought that I would relate an odd coincidence that occurred yesterday. My wife and I were walking about a mile from our house when I noticed a house that had water spraying from an outside pipe. We went around to the front door to let them know what was going on. Nobody answered the door so we knocked on the neighbor's door to let them know. The neighbor turned out to be the ex-husband of the woman who lives across the street from us. I understand that the goal of the thread may be to debunk this stuff but that was weird.

Not so odd when you consider that a meteorite was found with what appears to be primitive life in fossil form in it and that it is proven to be from mars... which is our very distant neighbour.

The coincidence is that someone actually found it(!) its from mars, it flew off of mars during a massive impact and landed on earth. That is a "needle in the haystack" sort of occurrence.

http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html

[nismaratwork]

Not so odd when you consider that a meteorite was found with what appears to be primitive life in fossil form in it and that it is proven to be from mars... which is our very distant neighbour.

The coincidence is that someone actually found it(!) its from mars, it flew off of mars during a massive impact and landed on earth. That is a "needle in the haystack" sort of occurrence.

http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html

Even then, given the nature of geology, the number of people on land, and the total period of time during which the earth is constantly bombarded...? It seems the argument expands even beyond that... finding such a meteorite, given the search, can be further contextualized.

[DaveC426913]

Even then, given the nature of geology, the number of people on land, and the total period of time during which the earth is constantly bombarded...? It seems the argument expands even beyond that... finding such a meteorite, given the search, can be further contextualized.

Well, the other thing to do is to work it backwards.

Given that we did find a meteorite with such circumstances, how common was the initial event? It would suggest that the Earth has been riddled with Martian meteorties containing similar artifacts.

[nismaratwork]

Well, the other thing to do is to work it backwards.

Given that we did find a meteorite with such circumstances, how common was the initial event? It would suggest that the Earth has been riddled with Martian meteorties containing similar artifacts.

BUZZKILL! I call buzzkill on you... :cry:

That was supposed to be the clever point of my Socratic inquiry.


...
...
...

I have to work on delivery of Socratic questioning.
:sad:

[Dav333]

Ages ago I tried to guess someones password in a popular pay online game. I just typed/spammed gibberish on the keyboard & hit enter it was the password. I quickly logged back out. Of course no one believed me.

[nismaratwork]

Ages ago I tried to guess someones password in a popular pay online game. I just typed/spammed gibberish on the keyboard & hit enter it was the password. I quickly logged back out. Of course no one believed me.

It's unlikely, but is it more so than picking numbers in the lottery? I believe you; it's not glamorous, you're not claiming special powers... just relaying an experience. What's not believe? If you claimed to be able to repeat this any time, THAT would be unbelievable.

[SpeedOfDark]

Is there a police report? Is there any actual evidence other then the testimonies of the people who it happened to? A lot of people saw the lochness monster and ufos don't worry I know they were just crazy also.

[nismaratwork]

Is there a police report? Is there any actual evidence other then the testimonies of the people who it happened to? A lot of people saw the lochness monster and ufos don't worry I know they were just crazy also.

Clearly I'm not buying any of the "spooky", but there's no science in what you say. In fact, your conclusions have been shown to be wrong, time and time again. The fact is that most people who have these experiences aren't "crazy", they just believe their own narrative for the experience more than any other. If you experience what feels like being awake, completely paralyzed, surrounded by lights while the world shakes... if you don't know about hypnopompic/gogic hallucination you'd soil yourself!

A lack of education, or believing what you experienced over the word of even well-meaning others doesn't make you crazy, just mistaken. Part of the point, hell, THE point of this thread and the entire concept behind it is to EXPLAIN those events, or at least examine them. If you can't, and your only retreat is to insult those using this for the exact purpose of the threads... Go away. You're hardly necessary to this endeavor; in fact, it doesn't seem as though you've even read the last two threads you posted in, except to skim the latest few posts. Maybe you think you're settling something, but you're just giving ammunition to people who want to frame skeptics, as cynics... like you.

[baywax]

Well, the other thing to do is to work it backwards.

Given that we did find a meteorite with such circumstances, how common was the initial event? It would suggest that the Earth has been riddled with Martian meteorties containing similar artifacts.

That would be like working backwards from today and saying that since humans did build skyscrapers, highways and space shuttles in modern day this suggests humans have reached such a similar plethoric pinnacle of engineering in the past. There's no reason to arrive at this conclusion based on this kind of logic. Finding the mars fossil ridden meteor is more like a fluke!

[nismaratwork]

That would be like working backwards from today and saying that since humans did build skyscrapers, highways and space shuttles in modern day this suggests humans have reached such a similar plethoric pinnacle of engineering in the past. There's no reason to arrive at this conclusion based on this kind of logic. Finding the mars fossil ridden meteor is more like a fluke!

This a common misunderstanding in cosmology/astronomy/astrophysics. Given the apparent scope of the universe, find one, and you have many more, which is why people would be so thrilled (well one reason) to find just ONE confirmed zeno-organism of ANY kind, or even organic chemistry!

Earth isn't the universe, but given how often we're pummeled by dust and rock, a portion of which is from our close-buddy Mars which shows evidence of being shot to hell by bombardment. So... you find one "mars rock" on earth, and it's amazing... two... not so much. Remember, you FOUND them, it's not all the mars-rock there is on earth. It's possible that this was a fluke, but from what we know of earth's history and present bombardment from 'around Marsy-way' would seem to indicate that this is NOT a unique event or object; finding it may be.

[SpeedOfDark]

Clearly I'm not buying any of the "spooky", but there's no science in what you say. In fact, your conclusions have been shown to be wrong, time and time again. The fact is that most people who have these experiences aren't "crazy", they just believe their own narrative for the experience more than any other. If you experience what feels like being awake, completely paralyzed, surrounded by lights while the world shakes... if you don't know about hypnopompic/gogic hallucination you'd soil yourself!

A lack of education, or believing what you experienced over the word of even well-meaning others doesn't make you crazy, just mistaken. Part of the point, hell, THE point of this thread and the entire concept behind it is to EXPLAIN those events, or at least examine them. If you can't, and your only retreat is to insult those using this for the exact purpose of the threads... Go away. You're hardly necessary to this endeavor; in fact, it doesn't seem as though you've even read the last two threads you posted in, except to skim the latest few posts. Maybe you think you're settling something, but you're just giving ammunition to people who want to frame skeptics, as cynics... like you.

That's not true, because guess what NO REAL SKEPTICS would even look at information like this they already know it's false claims or maybe chance or maybe lying. It's like ghost hunters, Monster hunters, and people who hunt for aliens on totally scientific grounds guess what those people aren't real skeptics because real skeptics know that starting that endeavor is insane because it's false.

[Ivan Seeking]

That's not true, because guess what NO REAL SKEPTICS would even look at information like this they already know it's false claims or maybe chance or maybe lying. It's like ghost hunters, Monster hunters, and people who hunt for aliens on totally scientific grounds guess what those people aren't real skeptics because real skeptics know that starting that endeavor is insane because it's false.

This is probably the most applicable definition of skeptic

skep·tic
3.a person who habitually doubts, questions, or suspends judgment upon matters generally accepted
http://www.yourdictionary.com/skeptic

To doubt and question are not judgements. And you are clearly not suspending judgement, you are passing judgement.

How is your statement consistent with the definition?

[SpeedOfDark]

This is probably the most applicable definition of skeptic


http://www.yourdictionary.com/skeptic

To doubt and question are not judgements. And you are clearly not suspending judgement, you are passing judgement.

How is your statement consistent with the definition?

These matters are generally accepted, they're entirely ludicrous are you telling me the lochness monster is generally accepted? No, therefore I would wave that off as well as I would wave these off for the fact that they're not generally accepted.

Being skeptical of something like Secondhand Smoke, recycling, and free speech in america is something to be skeptical of and something I AM Skeptical of and understand why people believe. Scholarly folks and intelligent minds don't believe in these "real - life coincidences" proposed to us, since they're obvious schwim-schwammery.

I found a different definition also

skep·tic   /ˈskɛptɪk/ Show Spelled
[skep-tik] Show IPA

–noun
1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2. a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3. a person who doubts the truth of a religion, esp. Christianity, or of important elements of it.
4. ( initial capital letter ) Philosophy .
a. a member of a philosophical school of ancient Greece, the earliest group of which consisted of Pyrrho and his followers, who maintained that real knowledge of things is impossible.
b. any later thinker who doubts or questions the possibility of real knowledge of any kind.


That seems like me DOUBTING THE AUTHENTICITY AND VALIDITY OF SOMETHING PURPORTING TO BE FACTUAL.

I've yet to see any evidence that I even have yet to be skeptical about, and that's much harder to try to look over and decide whether it is bogus or real. All I've heard so far on this forum is simply statements that people are making without ANY EVIDENCE and expect me to believe it. Sorry that's just not going to happen, not in my world, not in the world of a real skeptic, and not in the world of science. We don't just believe things people say, and try to find evidence for it, we hear the claims people say and their evidence to support it generally evidence is skepticised but we haven't even made it to the point of presenting doubtible evidence.

[JaredJames]

Being skeptical of something like Secondhand Smoke, recycling, and free speech in america is something to be skeptical of and something I AM Skeptical of and understand why people believe. Scholarly folks and intelligent minds don't believe in these "real - life coincidences" proposed to us, since they're obvious schwim-schwammery.

Skeptical of second hand smoke and recycling? Wow, just wow.

Remember, it's the "scholarly folks and intelligent minds" that came up with the above.

Also, are you implying those who study certain things aren't intelligent? That seems to be something you'd have a hard time proving. In fact, if it isn't studied an "intelligent mind" can't give a view point as there's nothing to base it on.

[nismaratwork]

That's not true, because guess what NO REAL SKEPTICS would even look at information like this they already know it's false claims or maybe chance or maybe lying. It's like ghost hunters, Monster hunters, and people who hunt for aliens on totally scientific grounds guess what those people aren't real skeptics because real skeptics know that starting that endeavor is insane because it's false.

It's good to have you out there, defining beyond language or the history of the term and philosophy, what a skeptic is and does.

Sure, it's just your own private definition, but it's YOURS... don't lose that! :rolleyes:

The rest, Ivan has covered, Jared covered, and frankly you should already know.

P.S. The whole point, by the way, of Skepticism... We DON'T KNOW. You EXAMINE. Again, get a dictionary, look up cynic and skeptic: you're that clearly a cynic without a desire to move outside of this nearly religious "comfort" zone to examine claims. OK... don't, but then hell man, don't post in S&D!

edit: You did get a dictionary, and you ignored the FIRST definition? "QUESTIONS".. not "ASSUMES OR KNOWS".

[Jiggy-Ninja]

I had a dream once that my cat was dying.

We didn't know why, she wasn't obviously sick or injured or anything, the feeling in the dream was just that she was dying. We took her to the vet, they couldn't do anything about it. She just kept getting worse, and worse..

And then I woke up. Needless to say I was quite disturbed by this dream; I am quite fond of her. So I searched the house for her.

Didn't take long. She was curled up in a basket of towels (getting her hair all in them like usual). I poked her to see if she was alright, and then she looked up at me with that look. You cat owners should know it, the look that says "What the hell are you bugging me for? Can't you see I was sleeping here?"

She was perfectly fine (still is, in fact). Nothing wrong with her. My dream was just a dream, nothing more.

It still worried me enough that I bothered to look up what the average lifespan of a house cat is though.

The biggest problem with "coincidences" like this is the law of large numbers, along with the "man bites dog" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_bites_dog_(journalism)) thing. For every person you hear about whose dream predicted the death of their grandmother or something, there's probably hundreds or thousands of people like me whose "prophetic" dreams were totally meaningless.

Unless they are consistently and reliably repeatable, they are nothing more than freak statistical coincidences, nothing more. They happen all the time.

[Ivan Seeking]

Unless they are consistently and reliably repeatable, they are nothing more than freak statistical coincidences, nothing more. They happen all the time.

That isn't quite correct. This is what we assume lacking evidence otherwise, and we have no scientific model to explain such alleged occurrances except to cite statistical expectations. However, the real test would be whether a particular sort of event occurs more often than we would expect. It is also true that there is no practical way to test some claims, so if there was a signal buried in the noise, we might have no way to detect it.

Repeatability is required for scientific verification, not existence. For example, there are some events that Quantum Mechanics allows for only once over the life of the universe or so. So in the extreme, it is possible for some events to happen only once.

[nismaratwork]

That isn't quite correct. This is what we assume lacking evidence otherwise, and we have no scientific model to explain such alleged occurrances except to cite statistical expectations. However, the real test would be whether a particular sort of event occurs more often than we would expect. It is also true that there is no practical way to test some claims, so if there was a signal buried in the noise, we might have no way to detect it.

Repeatability is required for scientific verification, not existence. For example, there are some events that Quantum Mechanics allows for only once over the life of the universe or so. So in the extreme, it is possible for some events to happen only once.

True, it's not worth assuming that this is nonexistant, only that no evidence exists to support the claim. The question then is, in the absence of evidence, why believe?... if evidence emerges, then that equation changes of course. If this is forever undetectable, then... it's as good for us as nonexistant unless it can be explored indirectly.

[Jiggy-Ninja]

That isn't quite correct. This is what we assume lacking evidence otherwise, and we have no scientific model to explain such alleged occurrances except to cite statistical expectations. However, the real test would be whether a particular sort of event occurs more often than we would expect. It is also true that there is no practical way to test some claims, so if there was a signal buried in the noise, we might have no way to detect it.

Repeatability is required for scientific verification, not existence. For example, there are some events that Quantum Mechanics allows for only once over the life of the universe or so. So in the extreme, it is possible for some events to happen only once.
I've not really learned much about Quantum Mechanics, outside the stuff in SciAm articles and various popular science books (I try to stay away from the New Agey pseudo-philosophical garbage and stick to respectable sounding stuff), so I don't really know any QM equations. Do you mean that according to QM, those events are only allowed to happen once during the lifetime of the universe, or only probable to happen once in the lifetime of the universe. Could you give an example of said phenomenon?

Even if it is possible for some events to only happen once, we wouldn't be able to draw any conclusions from those events. Your QM example seems a little off of the point I was trying to make, like it's going the "wrong way", so to speak; from theory -> unlikely prediction instead of from unlikely observation -> theory. Let's see if I can word this like I was thinking of it...

Take one of these highly unlikely, once-an-eternity events, and suppose it was empirically observed to have occurred twice in rapid succession, say 10 years between the two observations. Assume that both observations are accurate, reliable and correct; there's no doubt about what was seen. The event cannot be reproduced by any means, and analysis of the data does not suggest that there was any unknown factor affecting the frequency of the event. All that is known is 1) The event was observed to have happened twice and 2) theory predicts that this is very, very, very, very, very, very (ad infinitum) unlikely to have happened by chance.

Would such a freakish coincidence be enough to call QM into doubt? Or would it be reasonable to dismiss these observations as a mere coincidence, despite its unimaginably low probability?

If it can't be reproduced under controlled circumstances, it can't really be studied, so you can't draw very many conclusions from it. All you can do is say "It was a coincidence" and move on, at least until other data arrives. I believe that's the point I was trying to make. And I might still not be making it very well, or I could be totally wrong. I'm open to both possibilities.

[Ivan Seeking]

Regarding the statement about QM: One can use QM to calculate the odds of various events occuring over some interval of time. There are some freaky-strange things that QM allows for but only very rarely - so rare that it might only happen once over a span of billions of years. The point of that is that existance does not require repeatability, scientific verifcation does.

The point of my post was to make the distinction between those things that we ASSUME, and those that we actually know. Assumptions are not a priori, facts. We assume that all such claims can be attributed to statistics, but it is an assumption.

[Ivan Seeking]

True, it's not worth assuming that this is nonexistant, only that no evidence exists to support the claim. The question then is, in the absence of evidence, why believe?... if evidence emerges, then that equation changes of course. If this is forever undetectable, then... it's as good for us as nonexistant unless it can be explored indirectly.

Yes, I was only concerned that the facts are correctly represented. There is a common myth that arises by default that assumptions are facts.

Belief is a personal choice based on how one weights the evidence. It is at least conceivable that some people have real and inexplicable experiences with no way to prove it. For them, belief might be justified because they lived it. For the rest of us, it is an anecdote that carries little logical weight. In the case of apparent extreme coincidences, I doubt the leap of faith that these are more than statistical flukes, is logically justified for anyone.

I try to approach things from an even more pragmatic perspective: Belief plays no role either way. It has no place here. It is possible that there is more to some claims than we think -this cannot be logically rejected - but at this time there is no way to show evidence for that. Lacking scientific evidence or model to support a given claim, we assume it is all in the odds. That's all that can be said. No reference to "belief" was needed.

[Jiggy-Ninja]

I think I get your point now.

[nismaratwork]

Yes, I was only concerned that the facts are correctly represented. There is a common myth that arises by default that assumptions are facts.

Belief is a personal choice based on how one weights the evidence. It is at least conceivable that some people have real and inexplicable experiences with no way to prove it. For them, belief might be justified because they lived it. For the rest of us, it is an anecdote that carries little logical weight. In the case of apparent extreme coincidences, I doubt the leap of faith that these are more than statistical flukes, is logically justified for anyone.

I try to approach things from an even more pragmatic perspective: Belief plays no role either way. It has no place here. It is possible that there is more to some claims than we think -this cannot be logically rejected - but at this time there is no way to show evidence for that. Lacking scientific evidence or model to support a given claim, we assume it is all in the odds. That's all that can be said. No reference to "belief" was needed.

Yep, I'm with you, and the belief "state" we're each in, as long as we're committed to the skeptical process, is only something to discuss in casual settings anyway. Your separation of the two is something I must say, I admire.

[ibrakeforcake]

i experienced a weird coincidence at the weekend.

i bought two books from two separate stalls at a car boot fair.

one was Under Milk Wood by Dylan Thomas

the other was Coral by Steve Jones, the celebrated biologist;

the first chapter of Coral was all about the influence on Steve Jones of .... Under Milk Wood...

i was like OMG ( i wasn't really because i am not a 14 year old girl !! )

this is a genuine report of a weird experience.

ibfc

[Antiphon]

If they are both books about biology then it's not so odd. If they are about totally unrelated fields then its odder.

[JaredJames]

Yeah, I agree with the above.

It sounds like you have certain tastes and the fact you happened upon two books that match them isnt that amazing.

[skeptic2]

I ran out of gas in winter when it was really cold where there were no gas stations nearby. I was sitting in my car trying to decide in which direction I should walk when a tow truck pulled up in front of me and stopped. Instead of offering me a tow, he wanted directions to an address which was about 10 miles away and happened to be the same building where a friend of mine worked. I told him I'd take him there if he'd tow me to a gas station.

[Antiphon]

Is the skeptic(2) now a believer?

[skeptic2]

Possibly.

[ibrakeforcake]

If they are both books about biology then it's not so odd. If they are about totally unrelated fields then its odder.

that was part of the weirdness... Under Milk Wood is a play written in the 1950s

Coral is a book about coral by a biologist... i don't think you can get much more unrelated than that !!

ibfc

[Darken-Sol]

i seem tspend exactly ten dollars on random goods more often than any other number... well according to journal entries. also i seen a licence plate on a semi that had my birthday(1241982) except the first 1 was a J. which i interpreted as january.

[JaredJames]

that was part of the weirdness... Under Milk Wood is a play written in the 1950s

Coral is a book about coral by a biologist... i don't think you can get much more unrelated than that !!

The fact that one book was inspired by the other means they aren't unrelated - so if you are interested in the one, chances are the other may hold your attention for a bit. So it's really not that mysterious.
i seem tspend exactly ten dollars on random goods more often than any other number... well according to journal entries.

So you don't know what you actually spend on goods, you're just assuming it's ten dollars because a journal says so?

Still, it's a pretty round number and most things I encounter on a daily basis fall within that range so it's not surprising I'd find myself spending it a lot - consider petrol, unless on a long drive I always put £10.
also i seen a licence plate on a semi that had my birthday(1241982) except the first 1 was a J. which i interpreted as january.

Numbers can be made to show anything you want them to. You did it yourself by making the J into what you wanted it to be.

[Evo]

A few years ago I was driving home from work and a car in the next lane had a custom license plate PFSIS4U. I posted about it in the forum.

That was weid, we had just formed the PF Sisterhood.

[JaredJames]

A few years ago I was driving home for work and a car in the next lane had a custom license plate PFSIS4U. I posted about it in the forum.

That was weid, we had just formed the PF Sisterhood.

I'm always wondering how many people sat around me have used or use PF.

Wherever I go, particularly high traffic areas, I'm always curious.

I could be stood next to one of the big names here and not know it.

[Evo]

I'm always wondering how many people sat around me have used or use PF.

Wherever I go, particularly high traffic areas, I'm always curious.

I could be stood next to one of the big names here and not know it.It was probably PFS IS 4 U, there is a company here called PFS, but since it was all typed together PFSIS4U, it meant something different to me.

[JaredJames]

It was probably PFS IS 4 U, there is a company here called PFS, but since it was all typed together PFSIS4U, it meant something different to me.

You never know, could have been one of your sisterhood showing their support.

It's a long shot, but I've seen enough crazy stuff to make me realise anything is possible.

[physics girl phd]

A few years ago I was driving home from work and a car in the next lane had a custom license plate PFSIS4U.

I want that plate (if only I had my own car). Think of all the plates we could have (domestic, and abroad... and are motorcycle/scooter plates under different systems too? I really would prefer to scooter anyways.)

[Darken-Sol]

A pack of smokes, two candy bars and a cup of coffee=10 bucks. ingredients, that i didn't have, for taco night=$10. I have atleast seven occurrences in the last few years of keeping a journal. perhaps i just like spending exactly $10.00. Maybe I also am very quick at calculating math and am unaware of it. lets also say i have alist of all taxable and untaxable goods somewhere in my head. and i use this list to filter and adjust for tax on the way up to the cashier. then it seems a coincidence i have these abilities and they function so well without conscious thought.

[JaredJames]

lets also say i have alist of all taxable and untaxable goods somewhere in my head. and i use this list to filter and adjust for tax on the way up to the cashier. then it seems a coincidence i have these abilities and they function so well without conscious thought.

Assuming sales tax is consistent on products, chances are you'd know the exact amount to which you'd add tax to get $10.

So when you're out, you're aware of this figure when buying things and work to it.

It's really not a coincidence when you consider you live with money day in day out. I'd actually be a bit worried if you couldn't give at least an approximate total with tax. From this perspective, most people should be able to 'force' a total of $10.

Another note, now you're focussing on spending (you say you're recording it) it could produce these results.

EDIT: A second note, if you have relatively consistent shopping habits you would find yourself spending the same amount a lot, again producing false results. An example of this would be me always buying a bottle of drink and chocolate on the way to work, each day it could total £2.00 - "wow, always spending the same amount" - when in reality it's purely down to my own habits and nothing mysterious about it.

[Darken-Sol]

i actually live near the border of another state where food has no tax unless it is prepared.so the tax depends on whether i cook my burrito at the store or take it home and cook it. here clothing has no tax. my last post was sarcasm. i apologise. i really dont keep track or calculate tax. i do however write about oddities in my journal. its really not incredible.

[JaredJames]

i actually live near the border of another state where food has no tax unless it is prepared.so the tax depends on whether i cook my burrito at the store or take it home and cook it. here clothing has no tax. my last post was sarcasm. i apologise. i really dont keep track or calculate tax. i do however write about oddities in my journal. its really not incredible.

Wasn't an attack, sorry if you took it in any such way.

Just want to provide a more 'level headed' approach for anyone who reads through.

[Lazernugget]

Weird. That is all I have to say.

[Evo]

Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", I don't know why, I don't recall ever reading it. I just got off the phone with my daughter The Evo Child. She asked me if I had ever read them "The little prince" when they were young, and I said I don't think so, why? She said she suddenly thought about it last night so she went out this morning and bought it. I told her I had thought about it last night too. :surprised

FLUKEY OR SPOOKY?

[alt]

Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", I don't know why, I don't recall ever reading it. I just got off the phone with my daughter The Evo Child. She asked me if I had ever read them "The little prince" when they were young, and I said I don't think so, why? She said she suddenly thought about it last night so she went out this morning and bought it. I told her I had thought about it last night too. :surprised

FLUKEY OR SPOOKY?

If such a thing happens rarely, FLUKEY.

If often, SPOOKY !

(IMO)

[JaredJames]

Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", I don't know why, I don't recall ever reading it. I just got off the phone with my daughter The Evo Child. She asked me if I had ever read them "The little prince" when they were young, and I said I don't think so, why? She said she suddenly thought about it last night so she went out this morning and bought it. I told her I had thought about it last night too. :surprised

*whistles X-files tune*

The only thing I find a bit weird for me is that every now and then I'll just think "grab my phone" and as I reach for it it'll go off with an email/text.

But then the question is "how many times have I grabbed my phone and it hasn't gone off?" - I suspect that answer may spoil the illusion of my precognitive abilities...

[Ivan Seeking]

If one is to attribute such a story to statistics, then one should be able to show approximately what the odds may be.

Anyone care to do that calculation? :biggrin:

[JaredJames]

If one is to attribute such a story to statistics, then one should be able to show approximately what the odds may be.

Anyone care to do that calculation? :biggrin:

Here's a start for someone:

I get approximately 40 emails per day.
I check my phone anywhere up to a maximum of 20 times an hour (depends on boredom level). On average it's around 10 times.

I suppose you could assume an even distribution of each per hour and work out the odds they will fall together.

[Ivan Seeking]

Here's a start for someone:

I get approximately 40 emails per day.
I check my phone anywhere up to a maximum of 20 times an hour (depends on boredom level). On average it's around 10 times.

I suppose you could assume an even distribution of each per hour and work out the odds they will fall together.

I'm talking about Evo's story. Yours isn't that hard to manage.

[alt]

*whistles X-files tune*

The only thing I find a bit weird for me is that every now and then I'll just think "grab my phone" and as I reach for it it'll go off with an email/text.

But then the question is "how many times have I grabbed my phone and it hasn't gone off?" - I suspect that answer may spoil the illusion of my precognitive abilities...

You would find that weird ? Reaching for your phone, as you said up to 20 times an hour, and it going off as you reach for it - that's weird ? I'd call it weird if it didn't sometines go of in those circumstances.

[JaredJames]

You would find that weird ? Reaching for your phone, as you said up to 20 times an hour, and it going off as you reach for it - that's weird ? I'd call it weird if it didn't sometines go of in those circumstances.

No I meant it's weird if you only consider the times it goes off when it rings when I grab it. Something a lot of people do.

When it happens, first thought is "how weird". Followed by "oh, no it's not".

However, as I clearly point out in the first post, the moment you consider the actual numbers involved, any 'mystical' qualities take a running jump out the window.

I'm very much aware of exactly how uninteresting such a thing is.

[ibrakeforcake]

Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", I don't know why, I don't recall ever reading it. I just got off the phone with my daughter The Evo Child. She asked me if I had ever read them "The little prince" when they were young, and I said I don't think so, why? She said she suddenly thought about it last night so she went out this morning and bought it. I told her I had thought about it last night too. :surprised

FLUKEY OR SPOOKY?

is it possible that there was something about this book on telly or radio the previous day ?

ibfc

[alt]

No I meant it's weird if you only consider the times it goes off when it rings when I grab it. Something a lot of people do.

When it happens, first thought is "how weird". Followed by "oh, no it's not".

However, as I clearly point out in the first post, the moment you consider the actual numbers involved, any 'mystical' qualities take a running jump out the window.

I'm very much aware of exactly how uninteresting such a thing is.

Yes, I know what you meant. Still, I maintain that it is not weird at all, for your phone to go off sometimes as you reach for it, if you do so 20 times an hour. You seem to agree with that .. Followed by "oh, no it's not".

The actual numbers involved however, multiple times per hour, say 200 - 300 times per day (?) are light years apart from the rare incident that Evo described. Even so, as I said in response to that, if it happens rarely, that's easily attributed to coincidence.

If however, such things happen frequently to a person - things that might have odds of once a year, say, then that's a very different thing.

As Ivan was saying (I think) it's in the odds.

But I think we've been down this path before, many months ago - and no one seemed to be willing or able to tackle the odds.

PS - I'm asuming that Evo had no subliminal or subconscious perception of anything relating to the book prior to the event, ie, heard of it in the background or something.

[Evo]

is it possible that there was something about this book on telly or radio the previous day ?Possible of course, but highly improbable. I rarely have the tv on anything but the Food Network, and my daughter rarely watches tv, she goes to school full time and holds down 2 jobs, about the only thing she makes time to watch is Dexter.

PS - I'm asuming that Evo had no subliminal or subconscious perception of anything relating to the book prior to the event, ie, heard of it in the background or something.None that I am aware of, but the odd thing is us both thinking of a book neither of us have been exposed to at the same time.

But there is a long and bizarre history of these things happening between us. Especially when she was 12-14, and less so until she turned 16.

Here's an odd thing. When I was in my third trimester pregnant with her, a very dark, defined *beauty mark* appeared on the palm of my left hand, on the right lower side. It appeared overnight, I know that weird things can happen with pigmentation when you are pregnant, so I decided it just a bizarre pregnancy thing and it would go away, my doctor had no idea how it could've happened. When Evo Child was born, she was born with a brown *beauty mark* on her left palm in exactly the same place. We both still have the marks.

[JaredJames]

Yes, I know what you meant. Still, I maintain that it is not weird at all, for your phone to go off sometimes as you reach for it, if you do so 20 times an hour. You seem to agree with that .. Followed by "oh, no it's not".


I have no idea what you're supposedly pointing out. You're maintaining a fact that no one has disagreed with or even questioned. From the start I said I knew it wasn't weird, so what exactly is your point?
You would find that weird ?
I maintain that it is not weird at all

Your comments are as if I've made out it's some weird event. At best I said "a bit weird" but immediately after that I mentioned the odds and how 'not' weird it actually is.

I honestly don't know what is being discussed here, or what I supposedly said to bring it about.
Here's an odd thing. When I was in my third trimester pregnant with her, a very dark, defined *beauty mark* appeared on the palm of my left hand, on the right lower side. It appeared overnight, I know that weird things can happen with pigmentation when you are pregnant, so I decided it just a bizarre pregnancy thing and it would go away, my doctor had no idea how it could've happened. When Evo Child was born, she was born with a brown *beauty mark* on her left palm in exactly the same place. We both still have the marks.

A real life Madagascar.

You'd be surprised how subtle a suggestion it would take for you both to be on the same topic. Even an advert on TV neither of you thought you saw could do it.

[Evo]

A real life Madagascar.What's that?

You'd be surprised how subtle a suggestion it would take for you both to be on the same topic. Even an advert on TV neither of you thought you saw could do it.The thread is about odd coincidences, isn't it?

[JaredJames]

What's that?

It's a film, the sequel has Alex the lion meet his father in Africa and they only realise they are related when they see the birthmarks on each others palms in the shape of Africa:
http://i.fanpix.net/images/orig/t/b/tbndt7bixrn5ibrd.jpg
The thread is about odd coincidences, isn't it?

Well I'm working on deciding whether something is "Flukey" or "Spooky". Must eliminate all possibilities. If for example, there were a few TV adverts for it and your daughter suddenly phones you about it after you've bought it, it really wouldn't be that odd.

I'm also thinking along the lines of how often had you both been thinking about it and simply forgot because it didn't become anything?

[DaveC426913]

It's a film, the sequel has ...

Ah. If you'd said 'Madagascar the sequel', that would have made more sense (I haven't seen the sequel but I would have caught on.)

[JaredJames]

Ah. If you'd said 'Madagascar the sequel', that would have made more sense (I haven't seen the sequel but I would have caught on.)

I thought it was the first one initially, it wasn't until I looked up the picture I realised it wasn't.

[Evo]

It's a film, the sequel has Alex the lion meet his father in Africa and they only realise they are related when they see the birthmarks on each others palms in the shape of Africa:
http://i.fanpix.net/images/orig/t/b/tbndt7bixrn5ibrd.jpgLOL.

Well I'm working on deciding whether something is "Flukey" or "Spooky". Must eliminate all possibilities. If for example, there were a few TV adverts for it and your daughter suddenly phones you about it after you've bought it, it really wouldn't be that odd.

I'm also thinking along the lines of how often had you both been thinking about it and simply forgot because it didn't become anything?It's an old, old book, I don't know why it would be advertised. I read the wiki on it last night, so I know I've never read it. It's just an odd thing, considering I was walking out of the bathroom and when I got next to my bed I suddenly thought of the book and thought it was odd that it popped into my mind. It's a well known book, so I'd heard of it, but had no idea what it was about. Then the next evening when Evo Child just out of the blue asked me if I had ever read the book to her and I asked her what brought that up and she said she suddenly thought of it the previous night and actually made a trip that morning to buy it, I thought it was a rather odd coincidence.

[JaredJames]

It's an old, old book, I don't know why it would be advertised. I read the wiki on it last night, so I know I've never read it. It's just an odd thing, considering I was walking out of the bathroom and when I got next to my bed I suddenly thought of the book and thought it was odd that it popped into my mind. It's a well known book, so I'd heard of it, but had no idea what it was about. Then the next evening when Evo Child just out of the blue asked me if I had ever read the book to her and I asked her what brought that up and she said she suddenly thought of it the previous night and actually made a trip that morning to buy it, I thought it was a rather odd coincidence.

Certainly on the weirder side of things. It's going on my "spooky" pile.

[DaveC426913]

LOL.

It's an old, old book, I don't know why it would be advertised. I read the wiki on it last night, so I know I've never read it. It's just an odd thing, considering I was walking out of the bathroom and when I got next to my bed I suddenly thought of the book and thought it was odd that it popped into my mind. It's a well known book, so I'd heard of it, but had no idea what it was about. Then the next evening when Evo Child just out of the blue asked me if I had ever read the book to her and I asked her what brought that up and she said she suddenly thought of it the previous night and actually made a trip that morning to buy it, I thought it was a rather odd coincidence.

There must be some significance to the book for each of you, otherwise you wouldn't have thought of it in the first place, and she wouldn't have bought it - or mentioned it. Before trying to find a possible connection between these two disparate events (yours and hers), what is it individually that brought it to your discrete attentions?

[Evo]

There must be some significance to the book for each of you, otherwise you wouldn't have thought of it in the first place, and she wouldn't have bought it - or mentioned it. Before trying to find a possible connection between these two disparate events (yours and hers), what is it individually that brought it to your discrete attentions?No clue. Reading the wiki description, I know why I never read it, I don't like those kinds of books. I can question her more about it to see if she can recall why she would have thought of the book. It won't be the first time that she's thought of something and it's popped into my mind.

Of course she thinks of things all day, every day that don't pop into my mind. So when something odd like this happens, it stands out.

[DaveC426913]

'Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", '

Something triggered that thought. There must be a reason that you started thinking about a book - especially one you've never read. We can deduce that you know of the book (otherwise it's just three words string together).

Now, I'm not suggesting you are going to be able to figure out what brought it into your head - in fact, what I'm suggesting is that we know there's something that triggered it that you are unaware of. Whcih means therein could hide the connection.

(Kind of like seeing 100 feet of garden hose, but no water coming out of it, even though the water's on. There's got to be a crimp in it somewhere, yet you can see 99 feet of the garden hose is uncrimped. There's only that one foot section where it goes behind a tree trunk...)

[DaveC426913]

Here's a coinky-dink.

Last night on Family Guy, Peter and Brian were crawling through some ducting and Peter aid 'Not I know what a TV dinner feels like'. Brain said 'What?' and Peter said 'It's a Die Hard Reference.'

I'd never heard that comment before.

Today, by coincidence, I'm watching Die Hard on Sunday afternoon TV. That reference is more than an hour into the movie.

[JaredJames]

Today, by coincidence, I'm watching Die Hard on Sunday afternoon TV. That reference is more than an hour into the movie.

Now my line of thinking on that would be you were more inclined to watch it because you'd heard it - even on a subconscious level.

[DaveC426913]

Now my line of thinking on that would be you were more inclined to watch it because you'd heard it - even on a subconscious level.
Prolly.

[alt]

I have no idea what you're supposedly pointing out. You're maintaining a fact that no one has disagreed with or even questioned. From the start I said I knew it wasn't weird, so what exactly is your point?



Your comments are as if I've made out it's some weird event. At best I said "a bit weird" but immediately after that I mentioned the odds and how 'not' weird it actually is.

I honestly don't know what is being discussed here, or what I supposedly said to bring it about.



OK - I now understand that you said it wasn't weird.

[alt]

Here's a coinky-dink.

Last night on Family Guy, Peter and Brian were crawling through some ducting and Peter aid 'Not I know what a TV dinner feels like'. Brain said 'What?' and Peter said 'It's a Die Hard Reference.'

I'd never heard that comment before.

Today, by coincidence, I'm watching Die Hard on Sunday afternoon TV. That reference is more than an hour into the movie.

I'm sure you're not asserting there was something weird here ?

To make it simpler, I saw a number plate ending in 1234. I thought "that's cute" (or, I may have thought nothing at all).
10 minutes later I saw another plate ending in 1234. So what ? No one would claim anything anomalous here .. would they ?

I think the point of Evo's post however (please correct me if I'm wrong here Evo) is that she had a thought or mental impression of a relatively rare event, which subsequently occured in reality - within a short space of time.

If such events are rare in a persons life, it is easy to call them flukey - coincidence.
However, if they are frequent, if they occur with regularity, and have a low probability factor, then the question has to be asked - "where did the information come from" ?

[DaveC426913]

I'm sure you're not asserting there was something weird here ?

No. But what I thought was funny is that I had this funny coincidence occur while at that moment engaged in an online discussion about funny coincidences.

[alt]

'Last night I was thinking of the book "The little prince", '

Something triggered that thought. There must be a reason that you started thinking about a book - especially one you've never read. We can deduce that you know of the book (otherwise it's just three words string together).

Now, I'm not suggesting you are going to be able to figure out what brought it into your head - in fact, what I'm suggesting is that we know there's something that triggered it that you are unaware of. Whcih means therein could hide the connection.


You're not suggesting that she's going to be able to figure out what brought it into her head, but that something did ? I'm sure she knows that. And I'm sure she IS unaware of what that trigger was, else, we would have no issue here.

[ibrakeforcake]

No. But what I thought was funny is that I had this funny coincidence occur while at that moment engaged in an online discussion about funny coincidences.

i was reminded by the picture from Madagascar that i also have a birthmark ...shaped...like...Africa :eek::surprised

but not on my Paw

ibfc

[ibrakeforcake]

several years ago i noted some interesting coincidences in three novels which i read close together. i mentioned this to a friend in an email:

"....I hope you like the Puzzler book. There were several coincidences linking it to other
books i read recently. In the Whaleboat House the dead body of the girl starts moving...
it turns out there was a fish underneath. In the Tasmanian book they refer to dead cows moving
...due to being eaten from the inside by Tasmanian Devils. In the Puzzler a dead pig starts moving...this time a piglet is the cause !! "

it is possible that the "meme" of dead bodies moving due to animal/fish activity was passed from author to author when they read each other's books....or perhaps i subconsciously sought out books which were likely to contain such events. has anyone come across this particular "meme" in other novels ?

i find such coincidences intriguing and definitely positive, life-enhancing events ( even though the details in this case were decidedly gruesome !! )

ibfc

[JaredJames]

I just had my own DaveC moment.

Opened xkcd (without looking at it) and changed the TV channel.

Right at that moment the TV announcer said "and now for Family Guy and they're doing a remake of one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made" (Blue Harvest, the parody of Star Wars).

Then, I look at xkcd and on the first page as what I can only assume is a random pic they show on entry: http://xkcd.com/890/ (when I opened it was only http://xkcd.com, I added 890 so you could see the image).

It's a Star Wars Millenium Falcon joke.

[jhae2.718]

... what I can only assume is a random pic they show on entry: http://xkcd.com/890/ ...


That's not random, just today's comic. So the real coincidence is that today's xkcd is Star Wars-related. (I'm too lazy to calculate the probability of a random xkcd being Star Wars-related.)

[JaredJames]

That's not random, just today's comic. So the real coincidence is that today's xkcd is Star Wars-related. (I'm too lazy to calculate the probability of a random xkcd being Star Wars-related.)

Ah.

Still works for me - first time I've ever visited that site. Just saw a pic on here and figured I'd check it out.

[Ivan Seeking]

I was in A concourse, and the [St. Louis] tornado actually hit C concourse. And within about 15 minutes, I get a phone call telling me that the tornado had hit my house.

So I left to come home, and I had to hike in because power lines were all down. And I came across to the top of that hill, and I looked to see my house, and all I saw was a space. And there it is. That's my house.... [his house was completely destroyed]

SIMON: And one of your personal photographs got swept up in the cloud and wound up at the airport, traveled four or five miles.

HAYES: It -- yes. One of the men that I work with called me yesterday morning. They found a picture of my daughter and one of her classmates from 1997. The wind had blown it, and it stuck to the window of the break room that I work in.

SIMON: Well, that is absolutely amazing.

HAYES: It sure was.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/25/cnr.03.html

[ibrakeforcake]

On Thursday evening i was reading a book by Kary Mullis ( honestly that is his real name !! ) in which he recounts a strange event involving a GLOWING RACCOON.
The next day at the Gym i was idly watching a kiddies show called Wingin' It... and there was a RACCOON puppet...which gave off light !!:eek::bugeye:

I swear on Dawkins' grave that this is true

ibfc

[ToniLStark]

One day, I was sitting in my living room reading a library book when I came upon a library receipt. For whatever reason, I decided to see who it belonged to. It was my boyfriend of less than 24 hours. I'd had no idea that he liked books of that genre.

[zoobyshoe]

One day, I was sitting in my living room reading a library book when I came upon a library receipt. For whatever reason, I decided to see who it belonged to. It was my boyfriend of less than 24 hours. I'd had no idea that he liked books of that genre.
Just to be clear, you're saying you got this book out of the library and that you discovered he had taken it out before you ever met him, right?

[Ivan Seeking]

I asked a work associate what he was doing for the 4th. Not much, he replied. "No fireworks?". Nope. They stopped doing that some years ago.

Well, when you think about, said I, "you are just burning money". I swear, to the best of my knowledge I have never said this before or even thought about it quite that way. I always loved fireworks but am getting a bit cynical in my old age.

He responded by saying that's really funny. He attended a funeral this morning for the father of a friend. During the eulogy, it was mentioned that the father always referred to fireworks displays as " just burning money"

[Ivan Seeking]

My sister, her husband, and their kids were up from California. My brother-in-law was thumbing through our old Hubble photo book and in it found his son's birth announcement - now age 13.

[Waxbear]

I once listened to a song on a cd in a car. When i took out the cd and it automatically switched to radio, the station it tuned to was playing the exact same song and it was on the exact same point in the song as when i stopped it. The song wasn't a very new song, so it didn't get played often.