Constantly flipping a coin would at some point result

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holocene
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point
AI Thread Summary
Given unlimited time, it is theoretically possible to flip a coin and achieve 1,000,000 consecutive heads or tails, although the probability of this occurring is extremely low. The probability of flipping 1 million heads in a row is calculated as p = 0.5^1,000,000, which is a minuscule number. However, with an infinite number of trials, the likelihood of achieving this outcome increases, albeit very slowly. While it is feasible to flip a coin 1 million times within a human lifetime, the odds of achieving 1 million consecutive results remain astronomically low. The discussion emphasizes the distinction between events that are possible versus those that are certain to happen.
Holocene
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
Not sure if this really a math issue, I think it is, but I was just wondering about something.

If given an unlimited amount of time, do you think constantly flipping a coin would at some point result in flipping 1,000,000 consecutive heads...or tails?

Obviously it could never happen in a single lifetime, or even the lifetime of the planet for all we know. But is it safe to conclude that if given an unlimited amount of time, it not only could happen, but will happen?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It will almost surely happen. (Look up 'almost surely' on wikipedia)
 
Have you seen the infinite monkey theorem? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem]

What is the probability of getting 1 million consecutive heads? It would be p = 0.5^{1000000}, a truly small number. The probability of not getting 1 million heads in a row would be q = 1 - p, very close to 1. But, given an unlimited amount of time, we have an unlimited number of trials. If flipping a coin 1 million times is a trial, and we do many trials, q slowly gets smaller and smaller and p gets larger and larger.

p gets larger very slowly. A quick estimate shows that if you did 2^{1000000-1} such trials, you would have a probability of getting that run of 1 million of about 0.4. If it takes one trillionth of a second to flip a coin, it would take more than 2^{1000000-46} > 10^{249988} years, if my calculation is correct. Estimates of the current age of the universe are on the order of 10^{10} years, for comparison.

** No guarantees on my calculations ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Holocene said:
Obviously it could never happen in a single lifetime, or even the lifetime of the planet for all we know.

I am not sure that this is obvious. Saying something could never happen means that its probability is zero. As mentioned above the probability is small, but not 0. If you could flip a coin ever second, it would take between 11 and 12 days for you to flip it one million times.

Since we are able to flip a coin 1 million times in the range of our lifetime, it is possible that we could get 1 million heads in a row in our lifetime. (I wouldn't bet on it though).

As others pointed out this is closely related to the infinite monkey theorem. I suggest you think carefully about what you say can never happen, and what you say will surely happen.
 
Diffy said:
Since we are able to flip a coin 1 million times in the range of our lifetime, it is possible that we could get 1 million heads in a row in our lifetime. (I wouldn't bet on it though).

I get a rough upper bound of 10^{-301021} on that probability.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top