I agree with all of you. That's what I was saying when I said that the coincidence of date, for example, pushes the odds much higher, but would only be relevant IF one found sufficient evidence (in some other way perhaps) that human involvement was a factor. For example, if they had died of...
Mostly true. But let's look at this possible situation. People on a bus get on and off the bus a few times, and that evening everyone dies. Bus has nothing on it that would kill them, so one would conclude that where they stopped is where they came into contact with the 'agent' that killed them...
I think I see a point here now that I didn't see before. When I was trying to calculate the odds of it happening, the date seemed to be a relevant value in calculating the odds. The date CAN be relevant only if some connection to a human cause and one can not add that factor in until the link is...
Thank you for that answer! I don't see that I need to disagree with your model. I respect it for what it is. I see your point.
But if I were the CDC wouldn't I just be looking at one particular disease at a time? Like someone initiating an investigation over some observed apparent connection...
I used foul play as one example of a cause that may be linked to a date incidence. Given that the life expectancy mean is 14 to 18 months, that is a window of about 4 months, or 120 days, reducing the odds of dying on the same date from 1 in 365 to 1 in 120 if the cause of the disease was linked...
Thank you for that. I did miss that fact. I did see another figure but can't find a source for it right now. It was 2.4 per 100,000 and I believe that was the death rate from glioblastoma, but don't quote me on that.
I'll have to look up that Podcast. Sounds interesting.
I don't know what...
I found it odd that two powerful Senators which there are very few of alive, both died on the same day of the same cause. Though years apart. I was simply trying to find out if there was a way to calculate the appropriate odds of it being coincidence and whether or not one could determine if in...
Recently, John McCain died of glioblastoma (brain cancer.) The odds of dying on particular date is 1 in 365. He died of the same disease as did Ted Kennedy, on the very same date that Kennedy did. Glioblastoma affects 3.1 in 100,000 population. The mean average life span living with the...
Well that was a really decent answer. Funny that I never made the connection for Schrodinger's Cat to only be applicable to the macroscopic world. I took it to apply to particle and wave states of matter in the subatomic world. Funny that I never made the proper connection of the experiment.
Thanks for the answers. I never thought Schrodingers Cat was a real proposition, or that the cat could actually be dead and alive, a particle in both states at the same time, etc. I was considering things like virtual particles or quantum tunneling and whether the variation I suggested of the...
A cat in a box with a poison that may or may not be released, that hinges on a random event. Until the box is opened, the cat is both dead and alive, until a single state is forced by an observation.
Would it be just as valid to pose that the cat and the poison existing in the box is also...
I guess that I feel the 'capsule' to carry the payload isn't the most difficult problem. At least I hadn't figured it to be prior to this conversation. But there were things I obviously had not taken into account.
I agree 100.00000000000000000001% <---- floating point error.
OK well let me give a stab at this and see how I do:
There are two parts of the 'puzzle'. The first part is attempting to identify common factors between the values in the bottom row with those in the top row and making the...
Even the statement that "99 percent fail to find the correct answer." Implies logically that there are not multiple answers to it, that there is in fact only one right answer. And since it can be shown that there are multiple possible ways to interpret (provably) the values for the final row of...
True. But it is an assumption. Supposing you are right in the case of the 2 being the value because the hand points at it. And that the bananas have a value based on the number of bananas in the bunch. Both assumptions that appear to be true. But as well, the designer of the puzzle could have...