You could arrange a competition quite easily and guarantee that one person will flip the same side of the coin any number of times you care to name. It's the same principle as a knock-out tournament. Suppose you have a knock-out tournament of 8 rounds. By the end of the tournament you know that one team will have won 8 consecutive games.
So if you get 2^n people and pair them up in a coin-tossing competition of n rounds, at the end of the competition one person is guaranteed to have flipped the same side n times in a row. The difficulty is that you can't know in advance which person it will be. -- Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Tom C > Sent: 14 June 2007 00:49 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted > > Go flip a quarter until it comes up heads 100 times in a row. > Then get back > to me on that. ;-) > > > Tom C. > > >From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >Subject: Re: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted > >Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:44:15 -0400 > > > >Astronomers do not seem to understand chance, do they. If > the chance is a > >billion to one, what is the change of it happening in the > next iteration? > > > >One in two, no matter what particular iteration it is in, it > has as much > >chance of happening the next time as it does of not > happening. In other > >words there is no necessity of it going through a billion > iterations before > >it happens. And there is no assurance that it will happen > even once in that > >particular billion iterations. Once again no intelligent design is > >necessary. > > > >-- > >graywolf > >http://www.graywolfphoto.com > >http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf > >"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > >----------------------------------- > > > > > >Tom C wrote: > > > graywolf wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Hard to accept that you are not somehow special, isn't > it. Personally > > >> I believe random chance over >millions of years is the > simplest answer. > > >> > > > > > > > > > Noted British Astonomer Fred Hoyle wrote (note I'm using > this as an > > > example of a noted and respected scientist, not that I agree with > > > everything he says or that he's always correct... who is?) > > > > > > "if one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this > matter, without > > > being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of > scientific opinion, > > > one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing > > > measure or order must be the outcome of intelligent design." > > > > > > Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of > > > enzymes for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 > *40,000 power. > > > Since the number of atoms in the known universe is > infinitesimally tiny > > > by comparison (10 *80 power), he argued that even a whole > universe full > > > of primordial soup wouldnt have a chance. He claimed: > The notion that > > > not only the biopolymer but the operating program of a > living cell could > > > be arrived at by chance in a primordial organic soup here > on the Earth > > > is evidently nonsense of a high order. > > > > > > Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest > cell to the > > > likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard > might assemble a > > > Boeing 747 from the materials therein." Hoyle also > compared the chance > > > of obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance > combination of > > > amino acids to a solar system full of blind men solving > Rubik's Cube > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
