Help with number probability

nutnspecial

nutnspecial

10 MW
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
3,753
Location
PA
I've recently been interested with numbers. I know I know, that sounds retarded.
Anyway, I have limited experience (pretty much none) with finding probabilities, so I'm searching for the approximate probability of this sequence. Note that over 50% repeat.

The best way to imagine generation of this is to roll a 9 sided die for each number.

6 9 9 9 3 5 8 4 4 2 1 3 7 6 6 1 8 5 4 8 8 7 7 4 4 8 9 9 4

This is actually a real world number I pulled from what I consider a very random source.

Thanks!

//PS: to pique interest here is another. additional trend, identicle random source.

1 5 5 2 2 2 1 1 2 8 2 7 8 2 4 1 6 1 8 6 7

about 1/3 turned up in sequence which is still high,
but the main imbalance I noticed was too many 1's and 2's, the ratio in average number appearance seems way off.

So there are 6 doubles and 1 triple in 29 chances, and 2 doubles 1 triple in 21 chances

Much harder to figure is when they turn up in a sequence, like 3 doubles in a row. I'm not even sure how to start figuring that.
 
In that order?
 
View attachment 1

Since your numbers are dull and uninteresting, let me give you another sequence:

seedspirals.gif


0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 . . .

3725330_f260.jpg


Can you guess the next number? I'm sure there are some who already know, but noone tell him. (ABSOLUTELY noone.) Imagine having to know, sometime past midnight. Just having to know. Perhaps it'll come true.

I have a great link that'll explain this one.

fibonacci-water2.jpg
 
fibonacci-storm.png
I like the last one- a nice catch from the originator. Perhaps all of it is (Nice).
Yes, the spiral found in nature is interesting how it relates to mathmatics. Checkout #9code as well.


I used digital roots to make the random patterns much simpler. Each digit were all 4digits beforehand, and nearly impossible to notice patterns. I know there's ways to figure probability but am still looking.
 
Isn't probability just a simple of in your example 10 to the power of 29.

And the flaw in 9Code is that a degree is a unit of measure that has been created, what happens if we thought there were only 10 degrees in a complete circle, then the magic 9 is debunked?
 
Exactly, like betting at the horsetrack. Probability , odds. I hope 10 to the 29th isn't it though :idea:

Valid point. Nine code is intriquing, and also so is why 360 is used imo. It's about patterns though, math and geometry need rationality, so even if numbers were fishsticks and fiddlesticks, a pattern would still be emerge I think. It's like the fibonacci sequence. The numbers themselves aren't important, no matter what they are, if rational they will still relate to the pattern. That's my impression anyway. Maybe it's all poppycock :D
 
nutspecial said:
?.. I'm searching for the approximate probability of this sequence. Note that over 50% are in twos or threes.

6 9 9 9 3 5 8 4 4 2 1 3 7 6 6 1 8 5 4 8 8 7 7 4 4 8 9 9 4
Click to expand...

Assuming base 10 strangest thing about this string is absence of 0's. That is improbable.

Would not the overall probability of this string be... 1 : 69993584421376618548877448994 ?

Not a math guy.
 
[youtube]kkGeOWYOFoA[/youtube]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkGeOWYOFoA
 
I use fibonacci reference in my art ALOT....quite the addict here.
Spirals are infinite, so much connectedness within that formula in our universe!





DSC_0004.jpgDSC_0005 (1).jpgDSC_0011.jpg
 
Yes fibonacci is pretty cool stuff. check out 'number 9 code' and see what you think of that too.
I felt the 'hit it chewey!' meme was used quite appropriately the other day :lol:

Sorry, missed your question Dauntless, I can't handle that in 'addition' to my current problem :D

Probability on the other hand is ridiculous to the extent I wanted to find it. I'll attempt to rework op, but basically the simplest thing might just be to test for the occurance of double and triple numbers.

Lol, Yes, the sequence could be it's own probability for all I know :lol:
But no, oops I mistated 0-9 when it's really 1-9, that's why no zeros.
 
Thanky :D
Google "Reticello" for more pics.
Very old Italian technique...here's a vid on how it's done...
[youtube]xCrdewFgObc[/youtube]
 
First off, random number generators are anything but.

Secondly, the probability of a random 0-9 digit draw is 1 out of 10. And 10^N after that. So 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Right?

Playing with NumPy and the Lea package is sorta neat if you like playing with numbers


python:
Code: 
# this example uses Lea, a probability distribution package
# https://bitbucket.org/piedenis/lea
from lea import *

print "Nutspecial's random box of numbers experiment"
print "---------------------------------------------"
# define a sequence of values, each considered as equiprobable
box_o_numbers = Lea.interval(1,9)


print "The probability of a getting a single '5' is: "
print box_o_numbers.p(5).asPct()
print ""

# with a small sample size, running this over gets wild distribution curves
print "here is a random 29 digit number:"
a = box_o_numbers.random(29)
print a
print Lea.fromSeq(a).asPct()
print ""

# but if you increase sample size, it gets more sane:
print "now try 10,000 numbers:"
print Lea.fromSeq(box_o_numbers.random(10000)).asPct()
print ""

print "So what is the probability of:"
print "6 9 9 9 3 5 8 4 4 2 1 3 7 6 6 1 8 5 4 8 8 7 7 4 4 8 9 9 4"
print "being picked in random order?"
print "----------------------------------------------------------"
print "29 digits will take quite literally forever.  Lets try 4"
print ""

roll01 = box_o_numbers = Lea.interval(1,9)
roll02 = box_o_numbers = Lea.interval(1,9)
roll03 = box_o_numbers = Lea.interval(1,9)
roll04 = box_o_numbers = Lea.interval(1,9)

b=   ((roll01 == 4) &
       (roll02 == 2) &
       (roll03 == 2) &
       (roll04 == 2)).p(True)

print (b, 'or', b.asPct())

code output:
Nutspecial's random box of numbers experiment
---------------------------------------------
The probability of a getting a single '5' is:
11.111111 %

here is a random 29 digit number:
(3, 2, 9, 9, 5, 1, 7, 6, 7, 4, 7, 7, 4, 4, 6, 9, 4, 5, 5, 3, 3, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 1, 8 )
1 : 6.9 %
2 : 3.4 %
3 : 10.3 %
4 : 13.8 %
5 : 10.3 %
6 : 24.1 %
7 : 13.8 %
8 : 6.9 %
9 : 10.3 %

now try 10,000 numbers:
1 : 11.5 %
2 : 11.2 %
3 : 10.8 %
4 : 11.0 %
5 : 10.8 %
6 : 10.7 %
7 : 11.2 %
8 : 11.0 %
9 : 11.7 %

So what is the probability of:
6 9 9 9 3 5 8 4 4 2 1 3 7 6 6 1 8 5 4 8 8 7 7 4 4 8 9 9 4
being picked in random order?
----------------------------------------------------------
29 digits will take quite literally forever. Lets try 4

1/6561 or 0.015242%
Click to expand...

edit - I see the original spec didn't use a zero. refactored.
 
Can't deny, I wondered about the coloration of the glass.

So here's where I'm at: theoretical 9 sided die, and those sequences.

I originally wanted to assess the appearance of numbers, as the second set doesn't seem very average. Too many 1's and 2's, but have no idea how to do that. Even multiple occurances of doubles and/or triples in a row is beyond me.

So more realistically I might get close to the probability of just the repeating numbers showing up.

6 doubles and a triple in 29, 3 doubles and a triple in 21. Anybody have a formula?
Best I can figure, one double is a 1 in 9 chance. one triple is a 1 in 81 chance.

So on average 6 doubles and a triple should take 138 rolls, but it took 29.
The other is 108 rolls, but in 21.
What are the odds? (literally)

Oooo, I see your post adrift, that looks promising thankyou. Gotta check it out.
 
The program looks cool. If it could use my number, it would show percentage of certain digits sometimes high, and I guess based on percentages probability could be drawn. That forumula is beyond me tho.

I see it gets tricked up because it tries to gauge complete randomness of the set when I'm just looking for patterns? Is that something it could do? I'm pretty close maybe on just the occurence of doubles, but not sure where to go from above numbers.

Ps, Thanks r3! BBC stuff is usually very good.
Here's no.9 code-
[youtube]inWnhZp_A-M[/youtube]

Prompted me to checkout vortex math which is stranger
 
Thanks Adrift, I see your edit. Will have to think on that, because I don't see how the first four digits is .01% chance? I don't grasp what it's judging the outcome against.

edit//
So on average 6 doubles and a triple should take 138 rolls, but it took 29.
The other is 108 rolls, but in 21.
What are the odds? (literally)
Click to expand...
I think I got it. Real simple, divide rolls it took by rolls it should take.
Something like a 2% chance in both instances?
That can't even be possible I don't think.


Guess somethings wrong with my 'random number generator' if both of my first samples are 2% odds. . . .




say.png
 
nutspecial said:
Thanks Adrift, I see your edit. Will have to think on that, because I don't see how the first four digits is .01% chance? I don't grasp what it's judging the outcome against.
Click to expand...

A 9-sided die has 9 possible outcomes. Roll 4 die in a row and there are 6561 possible outcomes (9^4) or .01% you'll roll any valid number.

As shown in the above code, the more you rolls you do - the more the results go from seemingly random and start to drift towards their statistical rate of occurrence.
 
Interesting Dauntless, not sure what you are referencing but the article is good. I never realized it was something that even needed a skeptical viewpoint as contrast. I thought the same as 9code, just interesting facts. . . .

Adrift, thanks man, I understand what the calculator is doing now. It's very interesting and handy.

What I've resigned myself to is just the probability of digital repeats. The other things I considered would require a degree, as tailored probability calculations are vastly complex. One thing I didn't do was seek out a physics forum or the like. That would actually be interesting to put an ear on the wall.

I think my answer for each set isn't 2%, but approx 20% chance for either. Decimal point off.
Still low, but these numbers were digital roots, and the source may require a much larger test group to establish a natural average before measuring probability. I was a little bored on a dreary saturday.

The digital root and vortex math are new applications of mathmatics to me though, very interesting. Probably gonna forget about diy high level probability calc, a little 2 complicated for its worth to me!
 
He's pointing out your image of the woman and water and your lazy thinking and susceptibility to buzzy claims. Maybe he's also pointing another piece of false evidence you've brought forth now in another thread again without critical examination first...
 
Who would not have thought a woman's hair swinging would be some sort of serious indicator? I thought it was intended as obvious superficial cuteness. Maybe that was his reference, but are you sure. . . . absolutely?? :mrgreen:

I'm not a mind reader, if you have something to say, think it through and say it!

Per topic, I'm still not sure if the proper odds for digit doubling/tripling were 2 or 20%, or neither.
 
Sadly, many gambling concepts are based on relatively simple probability, yet our brains are tuned to 'try' and find a pattern. Hence I've seen people very convinced that the next roulette number will be X and so forth. Yes, the house wins.

Each time you roll the die, the idea is that it is an independent event. The more you roll it, eventually, the more you will see the result of the 1/9 probability per outcome. You can drive yourself relatively mad trying to prove otherwise, but its a fact. I remember actually doing this at uni with a coin flip (50% probability every time). Believe it or not, eventually the 50% outcome more or less perfectly came through, although it took a fair bit of doing :lol: It was just an exercise to practically explain and semi prove how binomial stats works. Before you scoff at someone actually trying this....

Its exactly the same process you are following, the only difference is that you are getting your numbers from a 'random' source. The only advantage is removing your own bias (I.e. ensuring every coin flip is the same).
 
r3volved said:
He's pointing out your image of the woman and water and your lazy thinking and susceptibility to buzzy claims. Maybe he's also pointing another piece of false evidence you've brought forth now in another thread again without critical examination first...
Click to expand...

nutspecial said:
Who would not have thought a woman's hair swinging would be some sort of serious indicator? I thought it was intended as obvious superficial cuteness. Maybe that was his reference, but are you sure. . . . absolutely?? :mrgreen:

I'm not a mind reader, if you have something to say, think it through and say it!
Click to expand...

Or maybe when others can just jump right on it and catch it instantly, that should be viewed as. . . .

BOMaGijCQAISrI6.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Question
Needs a wiring diagram for a Motorino XMB...
Replies
3
Views
237
Dave B.
D
R
Using a KT LCD Controller With Throttle Only
Replies
3
Views
986
richj8990
R
bruce.nali
    • Like
  • Question
Trouble shooting uneven cells
Replies
5
Views
399
whatever
whatever
R
Mixing cogs from different speed cassettes
Replies
5
Views
1,297
richj8990
R
ZenCog Bicycles
programming help, Folding bike updated to KT & need help
Replies
4
Views
1,157
ZenCog Bicycles
ZenCog Bicycles
Back
Top