Once and for all...are humans or robots better for Mars?

In article ,
Walter Bushell said:

Probability theory was {developed, invented} to gain an edge in
gambling. So the theory is out there somewhere. And they tell
everyone to *assume* a fair coin and I do suspect that all real
coins have a bias.

Can anyone know the formula for the most probable bias of a coin
with a long series of tries?

There's a formula for that?

-- wds

William December Starr wrote:
Walter Bushell said:
Can anyone know the formula for the most probable bias of a coin
with a long series of tries?

There's a formula for that?

The formula's almost trivial, I suspect: #H / (#H + #T). No reason for it to
get into squares of the numbers or more complicated stuff.

Now if you were asking WHAT that probability is (that that coin is biased
exactly that way), or how fast the probability for a given bias falls off
in either direction from that peak, then yeah, stuff gets Difficult.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeableBLINK
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

In sci.space.policy message , Mon, 27 Jun 2011 22:42:06, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
posted:

On 6/27/11 4:54 PM, William December Starr wrote:

Feed 0.5 ^ 1000 into Google and you get:

0.5^1 000 = 9.33263619 x 10^-302


Interesting. My calculator on my computer seems to do all right to a certain point, but apparently .5^1k is beyond that
point; it consistently comes back as 9.332636185032e-46 .


Program longcalc, via sig, shows that the correct value is
0. (301 zeroes) followed by
93326361850321887899008954472381716961709144637170 80246217143397959669109757756
34454440327097881102359594989930324242624215487521 354032394841520817203930756234
41066613832515027399507598590183151110049079626511 311824051251479593379080517827
11254151038106983788544264811194698142286609592220 176629104427984561694488871474
66528006328368452647429261829862165202793195289493 607117850663668741065439805530
71813632059984482604195410121322962986950219451460 990421460866836124479295203482
68646176579269160474200659363890417378958221183650 780455566284442739253875171278
54796781556346403714877681766899855392069265439424 008711973674701749862626690747
29676253580392937623383398104692787455860525369644 1650390625 .

Used longcalc cof 5 1000 pow wrt .

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London UK. DOS 3.3, 6.20; WinXP.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links.
PAS EXE TXT ZIP via http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/00index.htm
My DOS http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/batfiles.htm - also batprogs.htm.

On Jun 26, 5:07*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
Where do we get the AI Brain?

irrelevant ****e snipped

A damned good question. *Now all we need is a damned good answer (and
not just handwaving and fantasy).


Fred, being a rather stupid fellow thinks important real world work is
hand waving fantasy. That's been a problem of his for as long as I've
known him.

The references given below reflect decades of work in each of these
fields and I've chosen them as an introduction to each element.
Quantum computing uses superposition to quickly sort through
combinatorial explosion a major issue in goal directed programming -
like chess - where complexity leads to an explosion of states to sort
through. Genetic algorithms and simulated evolution are ways for
computers to write their own programs even design peripheral devices
that are fit to do specific functions to achieve specific goals.
Content addressable memories allow all the information in a systems
memory to be immediately available to match patterns or solve
problems. Confabulation - in a technical sense - allows past patterns
to inform present behavior in reasonable ways leading to logical
responses and behavior across a very complex field. These all are
trending to solve the AI brain problem. The MAVs shown in another
post of mine show the practical application of these processes.

1) Quantum Computing
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...9841702354668#

2) Genetic Algorithm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS5HWBNvf9U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5DIyUWR-YY

3) Simulated Evolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBgG_VSP7f8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_8tNGKm87U

3) Content Addressable Memory/Associative Computers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content-addressable_memory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUSUkBeOtS8

4)Confabulation (neural networks)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabu...al_networks%29

Implementing this in a microtublin structure allows significant
computation in a single virus sized device;

Microtubule
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQngptkPYE8

(William December Starr) wrote:

In article ,
Walter Bushell said:

Probability theory was {developed, invented} to gain an edge in
gambling. So the theory is out there somewhere. And they tell
everyone to *assume* a fair coin and I do suspect that all real
coins have a bias.

Can anyone know the formula for the most probable bias of a coin
with a long series of tries?

There's a formula for that?

Binomial distribution theory
http://people.richland.edu/james/lec.../ch08-pro.html
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

On Jun 26, 5:07*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
Where do we get the AI Brain?

irrelevant ****e snipped

A damned good question. *Now all we need is a damned good answer (and
not just handwaving and fantasy).

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

one day it will likely be a humane brain repurposed for AI, no doubt
for miltary uses....

having all crawlers transmitting back real time data to a central
location would minimize power hungry transmitter issues

On Jun 27, 2:26*pm, Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:52:44 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"





wrote:
On 6/27/11 9:42 AM, Michael Stemper wrote:
In , "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. *writes:
On 6/24/11 2:57 PM, bob haller wrote:

In addition statistically the longer something hasnt occured, the more
likely it will.

* *No. This is completely untrue. You Fail Statistics Forever. If I toss a
thousand heads in a row, the chance of my next coin flip coming up heads
is still one chance in two.

If you toss a thousand heads in a row, it's a loaded coin, and your odds
of getting heads on the next flip approach unity.

* *But what if it's NOT a loaded coin? Improbable doesn't mean impossible.

I did a little figuring. *If we say for the sake of discussion that:

* a) There are a trillion galaxies in the Universe, and
* b) Each galaxy has 100 billion inhabited planets, and
* c) Each planet is populated by 100 billion coin-flippers, and
* d) Each coin-flipper flips a (fair) coin once/second, and
* e) All the coin-flippers have been flipping coins at that rate
* for the last 20 billion years,

I believe the odds against there having ever been a run of 1000 heads
or tails are in the near vicinity of 10^250 to 1. *That just may be
close enough to "impossible" for government work.

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

heres a question for everyone, source CBS news the other night.

if the indian point nuke plant near new york city failes 16 MILLION
will have to be evacuated instantly.

the power company understated the number needing evacuation by
underestimating the necessary size of the evacuation area..... they
claimed 4 million or some such...

now picture the logistics of evacuating 16 million people, permanetly
relocating them plus feeding and caring for them during a stressful
time.

nuke power plants should of never been built near major population
centers

On 6/30/11 7:51 AM, bob haller wrote:
On Jun 27, 2:26 pm, Bill wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:52:44 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"





wrote:
On 6/27/11 9:42 AM, Michael Stemper wrote:
In , "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. writes:
On 6/24/11 2:57 PM, bob haller wrote:

In addition statistically the longer something hasnt occured, the more
likely it will.

No. This is completely untrue. You Fail Statistics Forever. If I toss a
thousand heads in a row, the chance of my next coin flip coming up heads
is still one chance in two.

If you toss a thousand heads in a row, it's a loaded coin, and your odds
of getting heads on the next flip approach unity.

But what if it's NOT a loaded coin? Improbable doesn't mean impossible.

I did a little figuring. If we say for the sake of discussion that:

a) There are a trillion galaxies in the Universe, and
b) Each galaxy has 100 billion inhabited planets, and
c) Each planet is populated by 100 billion coin-flippers, and
d) Each coin-flipper flips a (fair) coin once/second, and
e) All the coin-flippers have been flipping coins at that rate
for the last 20 billion years,

I believe the odds against there having ever been a run of 1000 heads
or tails are in the near vicinity of 10^250 to 1. That just may be
close enough to "impossible" for government work.

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

heres a question for everyone, source CBS news the other night.



You didn't ask a question. Can't you even keep track of what you're
posting?

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

On Jun 25, 1:48*pm, Chazwin wrote:
Better for Mars???
Mars doesn't care which.

The question was not posed in that sense. The question was: which are
more effective for serving humanity's purposes with respect to Mars.

Robots are a more cost-effective means of obtaining scientific
knowledge about Mars, but if we want a more comprehensive level of
understanding, humans are necessary.

Scientific knowledge is immensely valuable... over the long term. So
it is not unreasonable to take the position that we can delay
investing in it until we have a bit of extra money to spare.

John Savard

Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) sent the following on Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:26:09
-0400:
On 6/30/11 7:51 AM, bob haller wrote:

heres a question for everyone, source CBS news the other night.

You didn't ask a question. Can't you even keep track of what you're
posting?

Heh. Too funny. Maybe he was distracted by his "THE SKY IS FALLING!"
approach to a fearful life.

--
Jim G.
Waukesha, WI