matt grime
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 9,361
- 6
No mathematician thinks of probability as causal in the sense you so describe.
You realize you've now implicitly said that "everything with two possible outcomes is mathematically the same"? That is a fairly meaningless comment.
I am making no unreasonable assumptions: if the 50-50 long term behaviour is false for a given coin in a given situation then it is not a good model. Nor am I attempting to explain the reasons why a coin falls head or tail, or lands on its edge and gets stuck in a crack. Probability is a useful way of modelling such things. As a simple matter, flipping a coin 2 feet in the air is sufficient to use a probablistic argument to describe its behaviour. Ever heard of Buffon's Needle and Monte Carlo methods?
Why do you have a problem with probability failing to do things it doesn't claim to do?
A person would not determine with 100% probability the outcome of each flip, by the way. He woudl determine with 100% accuracy. Not that we believe that to be possible in a non-linear model, or a quantum mechanical one. We do not claim that with 50% probability we can determine the outcome, which is what you are implying there.
You realize you've now implicitly said that "everything with two possible outcomes is mathematically the same"? That is a fairly meaningless comment.
I am making no unreasonable assumptions: if the 50-50 long term behaviour is false for a given coin in a given situation then it is not a good model. Nor am I attempting to explain the reasons why a coin falls head or tail, or lands on its edge and gets stuck in a crack. Probability is a useful way of modelling such things. As a simple matter, flipping a coin 2 feet in the air is sufficient to use a probablistic argument to describe its behaviour. Ever heard of Buffon's Needle and Monte Carlo methods?
Why do you have a problem with probability failing to do things it doesn't claim to do?
A person would not determine with 100% probability the outcome of each flip, by the way. He woudl determine with 100% accuracy. Not that we believe that to be possible in a non-linear model, or a quantum mechanical one. We do not claim that with 50% probability we can determine the outcome, which is what you are implying there.