359 reputation
26
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 5 months
seen Oct 10 at 18:00

Oct
10
comment Do mathematicians, in the end, always agree?
"The reason this is so funny" -- What's even funnier is that he's completely wrong about the views of computer scientists. Many results in computational theory depend on such abstractions as "infinite tapes".
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
No, you don't have to consider his downcard, because you don't know what it is, just like you don't know what the last card in the deck is. Probabilities are a function of known information. What you're trying to do is take it much further than what I wrote in an attempt to avoid its validity. The simple fact is that you took the up card into account to reduce 416 to 415, but not to reduce 13 to 12.8125, and that's simply a mistake.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
"asking for the chance that there are 6 straight cards of the same denomination from an 8 deck shoe" -- non-grammatical; "from" should be "in", which is not at all what the OP asked.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
Your reading is obviously (based on simple reasoning from clear facts) not "a perfect reasonable interpretation") so ... done. Mere disagreement is useless; you need a rebuttal to simple points like those cards never getting dealt, being split among players, etc. All the other answers got the clear meaning.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
It doesn't matter where in the shoe the deal comes from, as long as you haven't seen any of the other cards ... probabilities depend on knowledge. In any case, a run elsewhere in the shoe could go to another player, or get split between players, or never get dealt ... it obviously isn't what the OP is asking about. The OP asked " odds are in getting 6 straight cards" -- "in getting" means being dealt 6 such cards in the manner that happened to the OP, not just having those cards in the shoe somewhere.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
This obviously doesn't answer the same question, because the OP is interested in the odds of drawing 6 of the same card, not the odds that there are 6 of the same card in a row somewhere in the shoe.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
13 isn't quite right because it's harder to get 6 of the dealer's up-card than to get 6 of the other cards ... so it's about 1 in 589298.
Oct
7
comment Incredible Blackjack Hand
"6,942,219,827,088 ways to get just any six cards" -- only 6,842,091,656,505 because there's a card showing. "13 times more common than above" -- Actually 12.8125 (12 + 13/16) times, because there's a card showing.
Aug
31
comment Are all prime numbers finite?
take the set of inverse squares -- or the set of reciprocals of any other set of natural numbers, e.g., 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, ... or 1/2, 1/3, 1/5, 1/7 ... I would of thought eventually there would be infinitely many zero elements -- how very strange.
Aug
31
comment Are all prime numbers finite?
Can the members of the set of natural numbers be put into a one to one correspondence with the natural numbers? -- "the natural numbers" and "the members of the set of natural numbers" are synonyms, so of course they can be put into a 1-1 correspondence. I've always had a problem with this kind of thing. -- it's strange that you think this is a problem with mathematics, rather than a problem with you.
Aug
31
comment Are all prime numbers finite?
@pppqqq The only logical fallacy here is non sequitur, like "I pulled a booger out of my nose but my nose is made of flesh so we have a contradiction".
Aug
31
comment Are all prime numbers finite?
For another example, consider the set S[0] = 1, S[n] = S[n-1] + (2**-n). So, 1, 1.5, 1.75, 1.875, ... There are infinitely many numbers in the set, but they are all < 2. Or we could just consider the set of reals between 0 and 1 ... infinitely many, of course, but none infinitely large. The claim that an infinitely large set must have an infinitely large member is entirely baseless, no matter how many times it is witlessly repeated.
Aug
31
comment Are all prime numbers finite?
@Jaydee If only finite numbers can be generated, the number of them must be finite. -- You repeated this many times, each time told you are wrong, and asked to justify the claim, which you never did. Repeating unjustified claims is bad behavior ... it violates the rules of etiquette and rational inquiry, and leads to having a stunted intellect. Yes, there may always be another generated, but it will be finite -- Yes, it will, but as you were told many times, that has nothing to do with how many numbers there are. To be perfectly honest -- if I were, my comment would be deleted.
Aug
14
comment How to write $b$ between $a$ and $c$ formally?
-1 Your assumption is wrong, as is obvious from careful reading: "I want to leave it in the middle which one it is. If I use the sandwich theorem for instance ...". IOW, b is "sandwiched" between a and c, and the OP wants a notation that says that without specifying the order of a and c.
May
6
awarded  Yearling
Jan
26
awarded  Good Answer
Aug
2
comment Can the golden ratio accurately be expressed in terms of e and $\pi$
@Harold You're mistaken; it is an answer. Perhaps you didn't read the question carefully.
Aug
2
comment Can the golden ratio accurately be expressed in terms of e and $\pi$
@Doorknob You may be laughing, but everyone else is shaking their head.
Aug
2
awarded  Supporter
Aug
2
comment Can the golden ratio accurately be expressed in terms of e and $\pi$
@Nick You should have expected it before you posed it.