In the news today

This is the place for topical debate and discussion about anything in the world (non-Queen related).

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:28 pm

Kes wrote:Depends where the planes are flying from, and whether the plane crash was a result of diliberate action by somebody.


Yes, there’s are lots of factors that are nigh on impossible to amalgamate into some useful probabilities. I mean, if they ground all planes for a week, days 1-7 are pretty safe!

But assuming a plane crash on any given day is equally likely, what’s the most likely day the next plane crash will be?
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Kes » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:27 pm

That's the same argument as where is the safest part of the aeroplane to sit, statistically.

Being honest. The closer to an exit as you can possibly be. Does it increase your chances by THAT much? No.

Which day of the week it is, does not have a measurable influence on aircraft accidents. It's not like the M25, where Friday and Sunday evenings statistically have more accidents because of the volume of traffic.
What is left of your dream?
Just the words on your stone.
A man who learnt how to teach,
But forgot how to learn.
 
Kes
Moderator
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 14551
Images: 747
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:41 am
Location: London, England
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 338 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:30 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:36 pm

Kes wrote:That's the same argument as where is the safest part of the aeroplane to sit, statistically.

Being honest. The closer to an exit as you can possibly be. Does it increase your chances by THAT much? No.

Which day of the week it is, does not have a measurable influence on aircraft accidents. It's not like the M25, where Friday and Sunday evenings statistically have more accidents because of the volume of traffic.


I think maybe I didn’t make the question clear - it becomes clearer when I give the answer and doesn’t actually have anything to do with aeroplanes. The answer is the next day.

Let’s say the chances of a plane crash on any given day is 1-in-100 or 1% (for ease of maths).

On day 1, the chances of a crash are 1%, so the chances of the next crash being 1 day later is 1%.
On day 2, the chances are also 1%, but the chances of no crash on day 1 were 99%, so for the next crash being on day 2, there must be no crash on day 1, therefore the overall chances are 99% x 1% = 0.99%.
And for day 3, it’s 99% x 99% x 1% = 0.98%.
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Kes » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:39 pm

To Mr Sacko. Apart from 9/11, can you provide ANY instances of exactly the same set of factors causing two aircraft accidents on the same day?

Even the incident in Tenerife, where one 747 taking off, hit another crossing the runway, it was a completely different set of factors that put the two aircraft in one place at the same time.

As regards the percentages argument, the fact that something happens or doesn't happen on one particular day, doesn't really affect the chances of it happening on another day. Unless you are talking about terrorist events, where security alerts ramp up after a terrorist event, and so you often find that the terrorists will not try anything while the authorities are on a higher alert status.
What is left of your dream?
Just the words on your stone.
A man who learnt how to teach,
But forgot how to learn.
 
Kes
Moderator
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 14551
Images: 747
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:41 am
Location: London, England
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 338 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:48 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:49 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:53 pm

It’s actually not got anything to do with aeroplanes. I’m sure there are plenty of aeronautics factors that can refine the probabilities, but my point is that if it’s effectively a random event with equal likelihoods on any given day, the most likely day of the next crash is the next day.

Also applies to any randomly occurring event. Getting a hole-in-hole, an unanticipated difficult intubation, the 0 coming up in roulette.
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:56 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:01 pm

Kes wrote:To Mr Sacko. Apart from 9/11, can you provide ANY instances of exactly the same set of factors causing two aircraft accidents on the same day?

Even the incident in Tenerife, where one 747 taking off, hit another crossing the runway, it was a completely different set of factors that put the two aircraft in one place at the same time.

As regards the percentages argument, the fact that something happens or doesn't happen on one particular day, doesn't really affect the chances of it happening on another day. Unless you are talking about terrorist events, where security alerts ramp up after a terrorist event, and so you often find that the terrorists will not try anything while the authorities are on a higher alert status.


It’s not really an argument, it’s just maths.

If the chances of something happening on any given occasion are fixed, then the chances of it not happening in x number of occasions decrease as x increases.

Any coin toss has a 50/50 chance of heads. And every time I toss that coin it’s always 50/50.
The chance of it taking one toss to get a heads is 50%. The chance of it taking 2 is 25%. The chance of it taking 3 is 12.5%. Of 4, is 6.25%.

Another way of looking at ir Is to flip it around. What’s more likely - going 100 days without an accident or going 50? Or 1? Or 1,000,000? The larger the number, the less likely. The smaller, the more likely. The most likely number of days between crash days is 1.
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:02 pm

sacko wrote:
Roger wrote:It’s actually not got anything to do with aeroplanes. I’m sure there are plenty of aeronautics factors that can refine the probabilities, but my point is that if it’s effectively a random event with equal likelihoods on any given day, the most likely day of the next crash is the next day.

Also applies to any randomly occurring event. Getting a hole-in-hole, an unanticipated difficult intubation, the 0 coming up in roulette.


i dont agree with that.

with aeroplanes, it is not a random event. an aeroplane crash has very precise causes. a plane doesnt crash out of nowhere. therefore it isnt a random event.

you should have used a better example, such as when is a pair of virtual particles likely to be produced out of a vacuum. that is a "true" random event


Yes, you’ll see that I added those caveats from the start.

If I’d used the particles example you’d have got it right, because we’re worse at understanding probabilities when it’s an example we think we know something about.
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:11 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:12 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby sacko » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:24 pm

.
Last edited by sacko on Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sacko
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 214
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:29 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: In the news today

Postby Roger » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:32 pm

sacko wrote:tossing a coin is no random event either. every coin toss is influenced by clear laws of nature. the trajectory of a coin depends on things like weather conditions, throw technique of the thrower, weight of the coin, gravitational waves (that last one is kind of a joke, or not) etc.

if two different people throw a coin, the chances of throwing "head" will vary depending on the thrower.

that is, if you want to know the "real" probability, based on laws of nature. the calculations involved are immense, and we cant do them yet (though there are experiments happening as we speak involving super computers). if the calculations can be made, we can define probability by 100%.

i would go as far as say, there are no random events, apart from the one i mentioned: the production of virtual pairs in a vacuum: its one instances where the laws of physics dont apply, because before their creation, there are no laws of physics influencing them: they dont exist yet


I agree, but they are effectively random for most real-world applications. You're unlikely to feel you're being cheated if someone suggests tossing a coin to decide who serves first or whatever.

Read this, it's good:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Drunkards-Walk- ... 0141026472
 
Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 20 times

PreviousNext

Return to Views Of The World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests