The probability of the accuracy of probability itself? Etc.

[Edwardo Piet]

What is the - positive I assume! Lol - probability that probability itself is correct?

And then you'd need the probabilty that THAT was correct...

I've heard of something called 'probability theory' and it having some relation to Karl Popper or something...

I'd be interested to hear more on the subject...

And hear some thoughts on this matter.

I dunno, I'm confused.

What is the probability of probability?

EVF

[Darwinian]

Trust you to come up with something like this hock:

Is probability something that can be described as either correct or incorrect?

If the probability of heads coming out in a coin toss is 49% then isn't that correct. So then the probability of that statement being true must be 100% which means that it is a certainty and not a probability.

But then can anything be 100% certain?

I think I needed notice of this question

[lilphil1989]

I understand what you mean.
If we flip 100 coins, probability says there will be 50 heads and 50 tails, but what is the probability of this actually happening in one sample of 100 flips?

Probably not very high! (definitely not 100%, i tried to get a numerical answer but couldnt figure out an expression for the number of possible outcomes that would result in 50 heads, 50 tails , total number of outcomes is 2^100 )

But probability tells you the average in the limit of an infinite number of samples.

So I don't see a problem...

EDIT: Just realised, I actually thought about this in the shower a few weeks ago! My tutor is writing a book on statistics in experimental physics, he should have a good answer I'll talk to him and let you know what he says...

[leo-rcc]

What is the probability of probability?

It's probably quite probable.

Probability studies investigate the likelihood of a proposition. Therefore the probability for something being probable is very high.

[allan175]

I understand what you mean.
If we flip 100 coins, probability says there will be 50 heads and 50 tails, but what is the probability of this actually happening in one sample of 100 flips?

Probably not very high! (definitely not 100%, i tried to get a numerical answer but couldnt figure out an expression for the number of possible outcomes that would result in 50 heads, 50 tails , total number of outcomes is 2^100 )

But probability tells you the average in the limit of an infinite number of samples.

Probability says it will average at 50/50 (or 49/51 according to that font of all knowledge QI!) but what it is saying is that the results will *tend towards* 50/50. The thing is you can only say it's a probability because the chances are that the result will *probably* be 50/50, but there is also a chance that you could get 0/100 or 77/23 (or any other combination).

A sort of related story...About 20 years ago I was playing Dungeons & Dragons with a group of friends and they had a method for deciding if a character was abidextrous (use both hands equally well). Knowing I was a programmer they assumed I knew maths pretty well (the fools!) and asked me how likely ambidextrous-ness was. I couldn't give them a definitive answer but next day at work I wrote a program to roll virtual dice and keep track of the results.
After leaving it to run for varying numbers of "rolls" (thousands or tens of thousands, this was a long time ago on old computers so it took ages anyway), I saw that the result tended towards a particular level every time and the longer it was left running the closer the fractional part got to a specific value.
My then wife had done maths at university and had covered probability and when I mentioned this she told me the formula to calculate the actual probability of what I was looking for.
Her formula gave me the same number that my program was tending towards.

[lilphil1989]

the results will *tend towards* 50/50.

That's what I meant :p ... in the limit of the amount of samples tending to infinity, the average will tend towards 50/50

[Edwardo Piet]

Well I said something about this in an earlier thread!
I find it quite funny the idea of putting a probability on probability?

Is that even possible? Probably I guess.
Or is it. We are using the rules of probability to put a probability on probability itself. Lol. Weird.

Here's a from an earlier thread of mine(Probability and Evidence):

I said: [...] "I'm confused lol, nothing is proven, it's all about probability, except probability, that's proven?

Or is there merely a 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 ​9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% reccuring probability that probability exists...

Basically I'm saying If nothing is proven everything needs probability...do you have to put a probability on the existence of probability?"

And then: "[...]I'm basically saying either probability is 100% proved truth...or you have to put a probability on the existence of probability! "

So I'm basically trying to continue what I thought to be a very interesting discussion that developed naturally and unintentionally when originally talking about the subject between the relationship between evidence and probability. I did not expect if to go onto trying to either put a probability on the existence of probability itself or consider probability to be the only thing that is absolutely 100 percent proven and known absolutely for CERTAIN....

The existence of probability is the only thing that we cannot put a probability on - it is the only thing we know for SURE. Or we have to put a probability on probability itself. Lol. Interesting I think.
And Josef mentioned Karl Popper and I'd like to hear more thoughts on the subject.

@ Darwinian;

Yes! Its confusing. Can probability be described as correct or incorrect? If it can't and it just has to be accepted 100% - isn't that kind of weird that everything has to be based on probability ... EXCEPT probability itself which has to be just accepted with 100% certainty?

Whether that be the case or not. I still do not really understand!?!? And I find it odd and interesting, and perhaps the main reason I find it interesting (perhaps the only reason?) is that its odd - or at least seems odd to ME. It seems like an interesting anomaly.
Or is it one? is it just an illusion? If the problem can be somehow solved (or is already solved somehow, somewhere by someone or some people?!? I dunno?) - that's obviously great. - It would be no fun and not as inspiring if there were never and rainbows to unweave.

And if this is already solved or not as odd as I think it is - then its not such an interesting anomaly.
Well actually if its already solved - is it an anomaly at all? Well other than those who think it is (at least myself) - I guess it isn't in that case.
Or rather - was it ever one?

Now I'm really confused. I've confused myself now.

Interesting Leo - intuitively at least that makes complete sense to me. The probably of probability is very probably very high.

Probably very very high indeed I would have thought probably just about (or exactly, perhaps?) the highest you can get. Makes complete sense intuitively to me...

But what I find really weird is we are using the laws of probability itself to insist that probability itself is very probable? Confuses me? I find it interestingly confusing. I can imagine thats correct but its just weird.
The laws of probability itself determine that the laws of probabilty itself's existence is very probable indeed.

Based on the laws of probabilty that is.
Its like circular reasoning that actually WORKS and self-evidently supports itself somehow?

Everything is based on the laws of probability therefore the laws of probability are very very probably self evident (in the sense nothing seems to be certain at all. We can only work with probabilities)
It is almost certain based on the laws of probability that the laws of probability exist.

Probability confirms probability. Cool - and weird and interesting.

So is there a chance that the laws of probability could be wrong? However small?
If the laws of probability needs to have a probability put on it?

Or that in other universes there (SOMEHOW! I can't imagine it! But hypothetically speaking) could be DIFFERENT kinds of laws of probability?

How on earth would that work?
Although it wouldn't be earth would it?

Unless its a parallel universe earth or something...!!!

Anyways - thoughts?

Evf

[WWLD]

I just think that maybe everything is 50/50

[chatpilot]

EvF you need a hobby my friend lol.First lets define probability,according to encarta=
statistics mathematical likelihood of event: the likelihood that an event will occur, expressed as the ratio of the number of favorable outcomes in the set of outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes.

In other words a mathematical educated guess based on the theory of statistics.It does not mean that it is 100 percent correct but that it is the most likely answer.Example: It is more probable that man is a product of biological evolution through the process of natural selection than that he was created by an infinite being existing outside of time and space.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yep. So if I understand u correctly Pilot - probability isn't 100% certainly known to be absolutely correct for sure...

BECAUSE its statistics not absolute gospel....

That makes sense to me - even probability itself isn't known....

So....but...what?

oes that mean we have to put a probability on the accuracy of probability itself? Lol.

Since it isn't known?

Or did you actually answer that Chatpilot and I missed it?

Evf