Science Saturday Open Thread

 44 replies

Science Saturday now has a sponsor, yes a sponsor! 

My business partner Rory Rowland is a coaching and leadership consultant who has help managers get the most out of their employees for over two decades, and recently started a podcast to give this information for free to his listeners.

His podcast is called Coaching for Potential and the most recent episode is How to Identify and Fix Poor Morale. Check it out and help support the people who help keep Arrowhead Guys up and running.

Let’s say you flip two coins. There are going to be three different possible combinations:

  1. Heads-Heads
  2. Heads-Tails
  3. Tails-Tails

So then what are the odds of each possibility? A lot of people think that they’re all the same. Since there are three possibilities, they each have a 1/3 (or 33.3%) chance of happening.

But this actually isn’t true. Heads-Tails actually has a 50% chance, while Heads-Heads and Tails-Tails each have a 25% chance. There are several ways to see why.

One is simply counting the combinations. Each coin can either be heads or tails. So the combinations are:

Coin 1Coin 2Total
HeadsHeadsHeads-Heads
HeadsTailsHeads-Tails
TailsHeadsHeads-Tails
TailsTailsTails-Tails

Heads-Tails happens 2 out of 4 times, which is 50%.

Another way to see this is to flip one coin, then flip the other one. If the first coin is Heads, then the second coin can either be Heads (resulting in Heads-Heads) or Tails (resulting in Heads-Tails). Tails-Tails is obviously impossible since one coin is already Heads.

The logic also applies if the first coin is Tails. The second coin can either be Heads (Heads-Tails) or Tails (Tails-Tails). Heads-Heads is impossible.

No matter what the first coin flip is, you always have a 50% chance of getting Heads-Tails. But in order to get Heads-Heads you need both the first coin and the second coin to be Heads.

Heads-Tails has two paths, Heads-Head and Tails-Tails have one each.

This fact has a surprisingly large amount of implications. For example, if you’re having kids and want one boy and one girl this is good news, you have a solid 50% chance at it.

In football it means in a 2-game series you’re most likely going to go 1-1. In other sports with 7 game series the road team will have a good chance of picking up at least one win on the road in those first 2 games.

44
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
12 Comment threads
32 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
UPYRSTexas ChiefMasterChiefprobablyamistakepompano Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
BleedingRedAndGold

Under 10mins. until the top of the hour, and the 3rd shift begins. Those who’d like a chat venue that’s a little newer and less cluttered…

MasterChief
MasterChief

This was basically the same as my first day in statistics class.

Imagine charting out rolling 10-sided dice. It would look like a crazy fractal.

pompano
pompano

What is the probabilty of a SciSat thread being about the subject ?

pompano
pompano

There’s no coin flips in hockey!

Tyrone
Tyrone

Well that over complicated a simple coin flip

BleedingRedAndGold

With the conversation in here so low, I hope everyone’s out enjoying the great outdoors and not the great-ouch chores.

Berserker
Berserker

Spreading topsoil today. My God it sucks, my back is too old for this. Anybody know an easier way to spread soil than using a wheelbarrow and shovel, other than buying a whole tractor for my little 1/4 acre yard?

probablyamistake
probablyamistake

Yes, hire a couple of laborers ya tightwad. 😋

Texas Chief
Texas Chief

If you live in south texas, just drive to a convince store along the highway at the very edge of town in a pick up truck. When you pull in, just point to the truck and say :
“Dos jardineros para mover la tierra por hoy $35 cada uno, almuerzo y herramientas proporcionados.”

A couple of guys will jump in the truck.
By the way, you just agreed to pay each one $35 + lunch and provide the shovels and rakes.

Berserker
Berserker

Ha! Cali and south Texas advise me to hire day labor…

It’s too bad I had to get back to doing my own yardwork – like most white people who don’t live on the very edges of America – or we coulda brought some controversy up in this thread.

probablyamistake
probablyamistake

Oh that’s right, CA isn’t part of true America according to “White America”. I always forget that while paying my tax obligations. Silly me.

Berserker
Berserker

Sure Cali is part of America. It’s just when Californians forget that they are just one little part of the country. Like just assuming that there’s day labor standing outside EVERY Home Depot, instead of just the ones in your little slice of the world.

probablyamistake
probablyamistake

Fair enough. Was just messin with you to begin with.

Berserker
Berserker

Yeah, I figured. And I don’t think that what I said applies to just Californians, either…. I see lots of people everywhere who have no idea that things are different outside the little few-hundred-mile radius they know. It’s just a pet peeve of mine, for no good reason.

Texas Chief
Texas Chief

I’ve learned so many things from day laborers. They are some of the best at what they do.
Before anyone has a conniption… min wage in Texas is $7.35 p/hour. $35 + free lunch and transportation to and from the job (tax free) is at least as good as what you would make working for a day ‘legally’, for someone that cannot work legally because they are not a citizen with a social security number.

There is no controversy in offering a job to someone at a set rate, and hiring them to do it. The controversy is in the political machine that keeps these people from getting a job legally because they are too busy arguing over asylum vs. wall building. If both sides of the isle would stop trying to further their political agendas, and focus on assigning more courts and judges to increase the speed of the current legal immigration means, a whole bunch of people would have already been vetted and approved.

That’s the travesty. Both sides of the isle argue about how the laws should be changed to favor their political preferences. Neither side is willing to improve the process that is already in place, unless demands that would satisfy their constituency are met first. Why not just fix the bottle neck in the current system WHILE we argue about how to change the policy in the future?

Berserker
Berserker

I disagree, there is controversy in breaking existing laws- i.e. employing someone who is in the country illegally.

It’s weird, you always struck me as a law-and-order type, Tex.

So, two reasons I wouldn’t personally hire somebody who can’t speak English for day labor. One reason is the risk of breaking several laws, like I mentioned. And the other reason is what I was trying to get across with my “edges of the country” remark – I’d have a drive quite a ways to find day labor standing in front of a Home Depot, in my part of the country. Around here, you go to Jamesport and hire some Amish guys.

So mostly it’s funny to me, you two guys being the ones to suggest I hire illegal day labor. But also, it is kinda irritating that folks who live in certain specific parts of the country tend to so often assume that the whole country is the same as their own little bit of it.

Texas Chief
Texas Chief

Yes, use a seed spreader, assuming it’s actual top soil, and not water logged or overly clumpy.
If you have a riding lawnmower you can use a tow-behind seed spreader.
You’ll spend a lot of time refilling the spreader, unless you have a big one…but it works.

Berserker
Berserker

Well, it’s bagged dirt, so it is clumpy. Thought about trying a drop spreader, but wasn’t sure how the rollers would handle the dirt even after I break up the clumps.

BleedingRedAndGold

Since we’ve got a full load of controversy today, might as well add to it. Anyone else notice that LJ27 tweets some bizarre stuff at times?

Fire_FG_the_moron
Fire_FG_the_moron

He does have CTE, but a lot of his ramblings DO make sense to me.

BleedingRedAndGold

CTE? That might explain it, not that I have any interest in engaging with him again. Tweet I mentioned today I rated as bizarre because it was a weird mix of religion and long-debunked conspiracy theories, with a side of wishing others ill. At least Crazy Rainbow Lady’s rant was funny. SMFH.

CHIEFSandSABRES

I aced the probability portion of my stats final. Took some studying to get it done, but it was kinda fun to learn about it all. Still don’t gamble, save for my $1 bet with lowbird on Hardeman’s stat-line!

upamtn

life is like a coin flit … always getting tossed around and then dropped

CHIEFSandSABRES

Turn green you!

KCChef
KCChef

UHhhh … Unless You Have Mahommes … Then the Chances of Winning are Astonomical !!! …Barring a ” Loss of Forward Momentum ” Flagged by a Corporate Shill of a Zebra … Bitter ? … Not Bitter … : )

BleedingRedAndGold

Not a bit bitter?

Chickennpickles
Chickennpickles

Whew! There’s no way this subject matter goes off the rails 😉

Tarkus

I give it a 50-50 chance.

CHIEFSandSABRES

May the odds be in your favor!

sydenham
sydenham

Exactly: since Tony S. made the reference to hockey I say a Blues-‘Canes Stanley Cup final would be awesome!

Leaf
Leaf

Nah, that would suck.

comment image

Fire_FG_the_moron
Fire_FG_the_moron

Im for anything that keeps Boston out. Carolina vs STL/SJ works for me. Prefer STL as SJ had both game 7s given to them by questionable calls.

Leaf
Leaf

The first game 7’s call isn’t what lost the game for Vegas and there was no questionable call against Colorado. It was a technicality that work in SJ’s favor but it wasn’t a bad call.

BleedingRedAndGold

Football has its parallel in the ‘blow to the helmet’ flag when everyone knows it was inadvertent and minor. But everyone also knows that the only way to enforce it evenly is to toss the flag every time there’s contact, you can’t have the refs using their judgement on it. So the result is a technicality that everyone has to live with.

Leaf
Leaf

The technicality I was referring too was Landeskog’s offsides which negated a tying goal in the second. Since he was leaving the ice, him being offsides really had no effect on the play, but since he hadn’t completely cleared the ice, he was technically offsides so it’s a legitimate call.

As for the Pavs injury, it’s definitely a controversial call (made worse by the apology by the NHL), but the way it’s written in the rules, it’s understandable why it was called the way it was. You are right about too many things being up to interpretation. But that’s been an issue in all sports. And the inconsistent officiating across the board in the NHL this year has been rage inducing.

BleedingRedAndGold

Once owners get in the habit of changing the rules for marketing reasons, it’s hard for them to admit that changing too many rules too often catches up with you, so you’d better rein it in, Hoss. But the urge to fiddle with things is a deep survival trait for our species.

vvet818
vvet818

comment image

Sorry man but been a Bruins fan forever but I try to make up for it by being a Chiefs forever.