Video size: 1280 X 720853 X 480640 X 360
Show player controls
I always keep my hopes up for learning something new and interesting with his shorts and they don't disappoint
@Cole Carmichael school lessons are deliberately uninteresting
Yes always interesting and something new
They are extremely disappointing. This is just pointless shit.
Me: *uses statistics for game loot and drops*Game: “he’s been spinning for 300 times now and still no legendary 😂”
@Alex Mercer gacha doesn't work like that. Even if the devs are pulling strings, it's usually just "this guy will have an easier time pulling this item, but in exchange, they will have a harder time pulling that item"
This a Diablo 3 reference?
@A-Wings Gaming me: gets bob in slap battles on roblox first try"I have it, the power"
@A-Wings Gaming holy this is so true. Once i got an item on my first try, yet I open my phone to see a livestream of people grinding for it 💀
“Here’s my favorite quote” - Action Labs*reads a whole essay*
Entropy wins out, regardless of application. And entropy is nature in its truest form.
So, there is order in chaos. Even though we have free will, we eventually end up at one place.
This explains the paradox of how each human is unique, yet history always repeats itself.
Factoid: this is one of the reasons why individual liberty is so important to protect. The mob can’t rule when we protect the individual. Yes even protect the individual liberty of people you don’t like. Because the other person’s individual liberty that you defend is also your own.🗽
@Peganin well the better way to phrase it is every human is unique, just like everyone else is.
History is usually repeated by individuals that give orders to groups. That's unrelated
or how you can build a dinosaur theme park with any number of contingencies accounted for and the dinosaurs will still get out of their enclosures and eat the tourists.
Statistics is so powerful. It is a branch of mathematics that should be taught to all HS students.
What I love about statistics is how philosophical you can get with it. “Foundation” by Issac Asimov really explored this pretty deep I felt.
It's the same reason why if you ask lots of people to guess something (like the number of balls in a jar or something) the average answer will always be close.
There's a game called Conway's game of life that uses this actually, basically each day you observe a bunch of cells and set rules determines which one live, dies, or get born. Statisticians used it to predict traffic in town
@alan smithee Why are you arguing with me when we are saying the same thing? I don't have the time or motivation to search the entire space of rule sets, and "it's more possible with a different rule set" is obviously not the point I was making. I'm most familiar with the default rule set, therefore that is the one I am most confident dismissing as a possibility. I don't know for a fact that _all_ rule sets have the same problems, so I'm intellectually honest about that. You're incredulous about the claim as a whole, I'm incredulous about the claim as a whole... we are in agreement, so let's skip the word games and pissing contests.
@David Hand I said it would be possible, not useful. Nor indeed a good idea of any variety.What I took issue with was that you suggested that a different rule set for the game would be better suited to the task. Unless you can explain why you haven't responded in any way to what I said. You've successfully made the case that it would be a terrible idea to try it at all, but I never suggested it wouldn't be.
@Benjamin Lambert You can thank the professor of my senior synthesis course that assigned me artificial life as a project. I took the topic thinking of constructing physical cells, being a biochem major, but alas, he meant Conway's game of life. Oh well. All knowledge is good knowledge.My conclusion on the utility of Conway's game is still the same as it was then: it's primarily useful for generating math PhDs.
@alan smithee it's a long, long way from Turing complete to predicting traffic. The game is implemented on a Turing complete machine; if that's the only suggestion that Conway's game is capable of predicting traffic, then why are we bothering with Conway's game? It would be simpler to just predict traffic on the computer using a special purpose program without inserting a meaningless layer of abstraction like Conway's game.If we are to believe the game is useful for predicting traffic, it must simulate traffic more or less directly, or it's just wasting clock cycles. So let's examine some of its properties to see how they match up with the mechanics of traffic. While cells in Conway's game are stationary, some assemblies of cells reproduce themselves at an offset, so we do have things that are for all intents and purposes moving, like cars. However, it is not possible for those assemblies to move at the "speed of light", 1 cell per cycle; they move at speed m/n where m and n are both integers and m < n. They cannot be accelerated, decelerated, turned, or stopped in place then restarted to simulate traffic signals, stop signs, curved roads, merging lanes, or intersections. The car's speed is a property fixed by its form. Any live cell adjacent to any cell of the car can have highly unpredictable results; they will depend on the entire adjacent object, the car's position relative to it, and the car's phase. The vast majority of such interactions will have non-conservative byproducts, i.e. the car and object may annihilate each other entirely or spit out 12 cars or infinite cars. There are assemblies that can reliably redirect a car, but they only work for one specific car at one specific position at one specific phase, so in order to use the same "road", you can have only one kind of car going one speed with an exact distance in between. None of this sounds useful for modeling traffic, does it?
@David Hand Fascinating. Thank you for sharing!
Ah yes, Psychohistory. The entire concept behind Asimov's Foundation series. A wonderful read for any Sci-Fi enjoyer.
@Remoralisation What are you even talking about? Are you saying that I am smugly lording over others because I read a book?
i agree very interesting concepts but very little action. i’m currently on the second book “foundations and empire” and i am enjoying the political disbutes and the second planet across the universe from the foundation. again, not a lot of action or actual plot but i enjoy expanding my mind and challenging my viewpoints so it’s very good!
I read “Foundation” series more than 45 years ago & I still notice its social observations today.
My thoughts exactly!
I came here just to see if anyone would mention Psychohistory.
I did some work experience once with University College London’s museum dealing with some of the Galton collection. He did some great work in statistics, but was also into really questionable stuff; like phrenology and his invention of the term eugenics. Part of the work involved his collection of glass plates with the faces of criminals on, which he believed could form a composite image identifying the facial features that marked an individual inclined to crime. He also had a bizarre glove and pin counting method for essentially playing smash or pass at the entire female population of London, in an effort to quantify attractiveness.
The bell curve of the goutin board is pretty cool. When they figured out how photons of light move through mediums it falls the same way.
I’m so glad this guy has become so much more eloquent. His early videos were so hard to watch while he sat there and went “wow that’s so cool”
I've been interested in chaos theory and the bell curve (partly from reading jurassic Park 😂) and these videos never fail to fascinate me! Especially this one!
"While the individual man is an insoluble puzzle, in the aggregate he becomes a mathematical certainty."- William Winwood Reade
we just do not know enough facts about the individual. if we did, we could predict their actions
That quote hit me with nuclear force
@Anónimos Alcohólicos who told you that?!
@Aidan Chappelle In real life Hugh Laurie is a very, very strange man. 🤔
I suspect that similarly, while we can't plot the exact course of the double pendulum, I wonder if it would be possible to predict, on average, how many times the small arm would invert in the course of one minute.
I saw this in an article about using AI to determine physic variables. The big idea is to find more variables in our universe that could link to better understanding, and simplicity. In this pendulum the AI said it had 4.7 variables(it has 4 known variables) , a lava lamp have around 23 and a camp fire have 47 or 49.
As someone who subscribes to chaos in general, this made me feel better. I can't control everything that's happening that hurts and is break me down, but maybe that's the point. Or not, idk I'm just looking for scraps of hope rn lol
Always love learning about stuff like this, keep it up man
This sounds like how the Antagonist explains how “Good” a little Chaos might be😂
The Most Possible creative person
WHATS SO FUN WHEN THERES NO CHAOS?
@Al B Dough yea if the position of every ball is random, the distribution should look uniform.
Well it's not about applying chaos it's about understanding how chaos can affect things.
As an initial assignment early on while studying animation we had gotten an assignment to accurately animate 2-3 seconds of a double pendulum system and I remember calling up my mum and her brother who are physics professors to explain the phenomenon to me and it was probably one of the most technical animations I worked on so far
The high number of balls falling at the same time ensures that pattern. They bounce off each other, and force most to ping towards the center.It would be different results if you dropped the same number of balls, but one at a time.
Took a whole experimental physics class on this last semester. Cool stuff. Look onto poincare sections of chaotic pendulums, I can send you some data and interesting stuff.
I love the idea of chaos it's extremely random yet there is so mutch if the randomness the next move is easy to find
The quote for anyone who missed or wanted to memorise/reread it “Whenever a large sample of chaotic elements are taken in hand, an unsuspected and most beautiful form of regularity proves to have been latent all along”
@Matityahu weak response laughing head.
@Andrew Jankowski there is.
Reminds me of DMT fractals.
@Matityahu oh man, I hate when I'm too late to read both sides of these types of arguments... Generally speaking, when there are as many replies as you've logged, (each short, to the point, and reasonable...) all to the same username, with the entirety of their responses deleted, there was something pretty entertaining unfolding. ...in the way an 8 car pile-up is entertaining. Anyway, appreciate your enduring remnants (for the archeological record.) 👌🏻✌🏻
I find regularity to be highly correlated to fiber intake. I've never considered any of the resultant..."forms" to be beautiful, tho. TL;DR - 💩 jokes are funny.
You should also do a video on some of the common assumptions and errors around the Gaussian curve and how it is often overrelied on as a natural outcome in all situations when it is only an outcome of some situations. It has become a constant problem on social statistical analysis and even in the modern school system as it is based upon an assumption that a classroom should always fall on a predefined normal curve when that is not a necessary assumption.
I've been thinking alot about it. Like if you perfectly know all the starting conditions you can predict anything, from a coin toss up to the outcome of a decade long war, and even up to the death of our universe (hey, that's me!)And if the end of all existence could be hypothetically predicted with an absolute certaincy then every event that have happened, happens now or will happen in a future is already determined. The only counterargument I can find for this theory is a certain amount of genuine randomness in microphysics. But maybe we are simply not advanced enough to see the pattern behind this randomness and therefore this counterargument is pointless.The idea of that all my actions, thoughts and even my personality were already determined billions of years before my birth makes me very anxious for some reason.
When you really get down to it, there isn't any such thing as something completely random. It's mostly just extremely chaotic but deterministic, but it SEEMS random because sometimes the number of determinate conditions are too many to easily keep track of.
The thing is you can’t really know initial conditions EXACTLY, at some point precision enters a quantum regime and it can truly become random or nondeterministic , some chaotic systems could be effected by that.
This remains me of Foundation by Isaac Asimov. Anyone that hasn’t read it really should.It’s basically a guy that invented a field of study that can predict the future due to human actions being predictable (until they aren’t, but it works like a charm in the first hundred+ years).
Yea it's a pretty terrible book to be honest. Pretty booooooooorrrriiiing
@unsub me were they successful in making you read again? 😁
I'm so glad someone else had this idea too! I loved Foundation, what a fascinating concept.
@PsykraM everything is predictable. If you know where every particle in the Universe is and if u have the capacity to calculate where they will move. You could predict the future and the end of Universe
'until they aren't' 🗝
Introduction and outcome. You introduce them in the center; the outcome will be bound toward the center. Distribute them and watch the outcome. I'm no statistician, but I'm expecting an explanation on more of the why and I've got the why in this scenario. New Scenario: Why does the trickle down system either work or not work?
Funneling it is exactly what needs to be done to make these predictions, I want to see this device without a system funnelling the experiment at the beginning I would like to see a single row which would represent equality from oldest to youngest then see how this “prediction” pans out then. Randomness is unpredictable unless you have coercion at the beginning to manipulate results
The last bit you said about predicting behaviour of large population reminds me of "psychohistory" a fictional subject created by Isaac Asimov.
This chaos is controlled, the taper spout determines where the beads will be centralized the most. If you look at an hour glass you’ll see the sands fall in a cone shape too.
The ball thing is pretty straightforward - at each barrier, a ball can go either left or right - it's just like flipping a coin. Most balls will have a roughly equal number of lefts and rights, not deviating too far in either direction. This basically maps the distribution you would find from flipping coins.
@Bryan Wagner I'm just a small town pizza lawyer but must object to your statement.
Do you enjoy balls?
@Lazy Ro , it's not Gaussian/normal, it's binomial. However, there is a nice theorem in probability theory that says a binomial distribution approaches a normal distribution as the number of trials increases.
@Lazy Ro ☑️😝😆
Thanks for putting that into to words for us.
This hit waaaay deeper than I anticipated. 🤔
I wonder if that connects to “the wisdom of crowds” idea, like counting jelly beans in a jar, most ppl would guess higher or lower but on average they would be accurate despite imperfections.
The marbles actually will hit each other in their road to thr bottom so actually you can predict the whole system, but you had never tested dropping each marble one after another till the end, this may leads to another results that is different and more chaotic than this
Problem is, you can never compute with a random irrational number exactly because no computer can represent it. So "deterministic" is living in the fantasyland where abstractions can completely cover reality.
As a Statistics graduate, I was so happy to see the nearly perfect normal distribution of balls in each slot hahaha
I bet your happy to see balls in any context there hippy.
Good thing they did or your diploma would've been void xD
@Pam Data science and analytics is booming for many industries - mainly to understand trends in the market and business growth. Also, statistics is used heavily in high volume manufacturing to characterize and control process variation (statistical process control - SPC). I worked as a process engineer for years in the semiconductor industry but now lead a team of data analysts and statistical engineers to implement new systems for SPC. Both applications, among many others are booming. Definitely recommend to get into that line of work. Also, love to flex my stat muscles on fantasy sports.. my true love
What kind of job does a statistics Graduate get? Asking for a friend 😶
This was awesome 👏🏼 Thanks for creating &sharing 👍🙏
Can someone help me with this? I remember a long time ago watching a documentary and some scientist was explaining how something like “waves or light” occurred in a chaotic fashion. And went on to talk about how our world was based on patterns or probabilities. Supposedly Albert Einstein would have rejected this his theory because he believed everything in our universe should have mathematical/predictable outcomes, and the notion that outliers would always occur wouldn’t be acceptable.I saw this over a decade ago and I don’t remember where and I may have botched the details, but what is theory called? I think it has something to do with physics.
With a large enough sample, the probability of something to happen will become the ratio of happenings over the course of a period of time, with negligible variance.If you can calculate and predict every motion of every atom in the universe every second, you can precisely predict the future until the end of time and read into the past since the dawn of time.Both show a deterministic and absolute nature of the universe. Does it matter? Not really, our lives are interesting and chaotic enough for that to not really matter, like at all.
Ah sir Francis Galton, the dude who strongly believed people needed to have “pure” relationships and have offspring only with people who had “good enough” genes 😂
And the next chapter is titled:"SOCIAL ENGINEERING"
Exactly. That's how they make a bunch of zombies who follow whatever their masters are going to do.
@zino dz Quit cryinnnnn
@Drago ofcourse . Cuz you ain't much without it .
@zino dz I got this Barret M82 on ya face
Naw man, this some psychohistory shit
Wasn't it almost impossible to predict a pendulum with two points instead of one until very recently?
This is why I can't stand people that put the plinko chip down the side on the Price is Right.
I think it's all dependent on how the structure is built and would seem like chaos but everything would fall into place or in order.
I love chaos.There is an observable phenomenon in the logistic map.The fibonacci sequence can be seen in the feigenbaum alpha constant that is apparent in the bifurcations.This is one of the craziest discoveries I have ever seen.
"It's completely chaotic, not random" I'll keep that quote in mind (for when I want to describe a character)
@M60gunner1971 Disney Mona….copierssss…pasteeeyyyy and nooooo clickkkkkkkieeeee no commas cuz listen to what I mean not what I say or how I say it write it down because you still understood right or did you fail as you fell for my little trap for you to discover and find out what perception I mean(t) is what I’m testing you you silly son of an auto correcting can’t be found…error on the Internet making fun of people I don’t know how to properly spell because guess what who cares?! Here’s a cookie 🍪 we ran out of gold stars 🌟 so here’s a strawberry milk to wash that sugar and chocolate down…oh and a spoonful of cinnamon! Let’s see who comes out of your mouth next….
(THE WORLD REVOLVING starts playing)
"No matter where you go, there you are."-Buckaroo Bonzai
So you are not the penguin of doom that holds a spork
actually that device with the little balls that form a bell curve, is set up to make a bell curve. The idea is what counts, but it is built with that purpose in mind.Try spreading evenly the top tank across the whole with of the device. And also place in a square grid the little pins.
"My boy, all things are ordered and explicable. Even chaos harkens to the beat of unseen principles." -Big D
Damn, this is exactly what my dad sees me as: predictable chaos 💀
@Enriques sadly, I can verify that this is not the reason, lol
It's because you always switch the TV remote thing.
"chaotic" and "random" are the same thing in actuality, just semantics. When many trials of a random outcome are performed the "law of high probabilities" (not native English speaker so it may be translated differently, but you should understand what I mean) is activated; therefore the vast majority of results will lean towards the average. Nothing world-shattering here. Also, you cannot actually predict anything, because any "infinitely small" probability may be considered zero for a trial with many repetitions, but in the case of singular events can be the single unpredicted result. It is a fallacy to try and use statistics for singular events (like a population decision)
“It can be impossible to determine what any person will do, but one can (with precision) determine what the *average* person will do”
But how does one go about doing that??
@Brian Lighthart policy makers should read your comment asap. They see every problem as a nail because their only tool is a hammer. They're afraid of losing votes and such.
Good responses. It’s very important that policy-makers understand that statistical analysis is predictive of aggregate behavior, not individual behavior. What works in general will not not work in some cases. Statistics is science. Its application to politics is not.
@wired vibe its more about generalizing juxtaposed to specifics. A specific individuals actions can be almost impossible to predict. But it can be fairly easy to predict how an average, normal person would react to a situation. “Is everybody running from something? I suppose i will run too, they must have a good reason” This is an average response.“I care about people in that building everyone is running from, i will run to it to help!” This is a specific response
Is "the average person" and "people on average" the same? Because you can be an average person, however you cannot be people on average. Another way of thinking about it. You can be described as an average person, however you cannot be described as people on average...The whole point is that the average person is unpredictable.
It's not chaotic if there are so many released at the same time especially being made of identical materials and dimensions. That's why it works for "crowds". Dropped one by one no pattern would emerge.
There is a great series of science fiction novels by Isaac Asimov, the Foundation Series, that addresses this idea of predicting the future. He dubbed it Psychohistory!
I'm at this point in life where (look at my profile pic it should help you understand visually what I see in my life) I'm learning how to control chaos... could you do a video on this... and maybe I can help support your evidence with my own findings in life. Please?. I truly love your channel and everything you teach in here. The video could be called "Controlled Chaos."
Wow! Nicely explained ☺️
That's part of the reality of how things work. Nothing is actually random, there's just so many variables to calculate precisely that we won't know the result before it happens.
This is very interesting, thank you for sharing
Tjere's also a tripple pendulum or chaos pendulum which is really really awesome and it's clode to impossible to get it moving the same way twice.
The double pendulum with the light on it - I bet that would be so cool to see in a long exposure photo.
That’s also why people need to rely on large sample studies and not individual anecdotal evidence; their individual case might simply be an outlier.
@Cindy "So listen to the scientist who devote their lives..."Woah... be careful there. Just because someone is a scientist, doesn't mean they have transcends beyond their mortal coil and all of its biases. In the of the day, they're still biologically humans with their own pre-existing beliefs and ideologies, not some arbiter of ethics and morality Ironically, the way you're thinking is what lead to the degradation of science, turning it into just another dogmatic ideologies. Essentially, making science absolute instead of an endless march towards the absoluteEdit: ngl, I was a bit upset at how you quickly dismissed Jason Clouse's warning. Especially when your rebuttal is just to insert an absolutist argument
Anecdotal evidence is worthless when you’re dealing with systems or large groups, but literally the only data that matters when dealing with individuals. “I have a crushing pain in my chest” is, absolutely literally, 100% anecdotal evidence - yes it is!!!!!! - but ignoring that evidence gets you a dead patient.
@Mr. O You as well. You both are sick people.
@Mr. O guess what, “Mister”, you are free from the burden of deciding on whether to have an abortion because you can’t get pregnant, so let the women decide. End of story.
@Bat Man You also fall under the category of people who don’t know who controls what and that’s why you just vilify the the rich and mighty people. If you guys actually want to discuss about conspiracy theories then do it correctly. Bill Gates is relatively very poor to some other people. So is Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos etc.Yes, they want to control people, almost everyone wants to do that if they have the chance. But what does vaccinating people have to do with that? There isn’t a single power that everyone in the world obeys to. Especially not China. The companies that own the world are BlackRock and Vanguard Group.
This guy is my undercover professor I learn something new every video
Well those steel balls are perpendicular to the highest row, It only makes sense that it would yield the highest set filled. Also, how can "chaos" be measured? If it's "measured" then how can it be chaotic?
Cool! This is like photon packets creating a wave pattern like normal light/ sound waves make
As the size of the sample increases, especially above 30, the distribution of frequency becomes more Normally distributed.. wish my stats teacher had shown this.
The most profound part of this for me. Is a predictability of human beings as a chaotic system. Blew my mind
The most profound part of this is me.Me, myself, and I.
Veronica Mancinelli upon more and more sub headlines
Veronica Mancinelli btw nowadays those types of models are used to stir up a green revolution. I’ll happy provide someone’s rhetoric. I have a present insight of today’s history
Veronica Mancinelli I’m so happy that I’m finding this word in every channel that I’m subscribed to compared to the last 2 years
@juggernautjigsaw99 that’s only after observing a lot of behavior, not general human behavior.
This seems to be quite similar to the idea of superdeterminism in regards to quantum physics, by which if we were to know the exact starting conditions of a moving particle, and could reproduce those conditions, then it wouldn't show up as a wave form, as we are used to, but have the same trajectory
Well, technically everything is random given that if you look on a small enough scale everything is probabilistic rather than deterministic.
Looks like the wave function in quantum mechanics. Cool!!
Instead of letting all those beads fall at once, drop one at time(or even 3, 4, 5 or 6 at at a time), and see how different the results are.
I once had the pleasure of toying with a triple pendulum, though it didn’t have fancy lights like the double one in the video, very fascinating to watch, my first “experiment” was trying to make it repeat the same behaviour, at first it seemed very similar but the sensitivity of it was quickly apparent, that and my inability to hold an object steady and precisely haha
Damn it's a gpod way to fight against market manipulation.Thank you.By the way could you explain more :3
Would it behave the same way if you dropped one ball at a time and not all of them at once? I feel like they might influence and block eachother so that they mostly end in the middle?
Isn't the entire universe posited by many to be deterministic? I'm guessing that if such is the case (I think we don't know for sure) the chaotic events are only to us, since we don't have the capability of knowing sufficient information for certain scenarios.
Woah, what the heck. This was like, "here are some cool chaotic collisions and simple systems, therefore psychohistory is real." Like, no, we can't predict what large groups of people are going to do with any degree of accuracy. Economists, political theorists, and cult leaders try, but it turns out the chaos in the system has yet to be understood.
That's why Clip-Share makes seemingly stupid decisions such as removing dislikes. An individual knows it's stupid, but YT knows it will sway the views of a portion of the masses.
@Jan Elan Testaverde why Rube?
@Patrick Oliver Bustamante Clip-Share puts ads on a lot of videos, even on some channels that aren’t monetized. If I had a sure fire way to see how much of the ad money is going to creators I probably couldn’t use it. But I don’t, so I use adblock
@M Geller Yeah but see that just makes it worse for YT. Us that know why they took away the dislikes are just going to inform others who don't know or they will hear about it and start to hear what other people are saying about it which will become the Main Street thought in their mind about why they removed the dislike button. So they actually make it worse for themselves by doing actions like this. Let's not forget even though the average person does follow the masses when they perceive that a new opinion is becoming the primary mainstream thought they will think about it and possibly change their mind. Especially due to the fact that people are seeing the dislikes on certain ideas on videos so when they wonder why they hear someone says oh it's because they want to hide certain things, that gives credibility to those who say it.
Only because they have almost complete control of this medium of entertainment. There are very few competitors, and whenever a new similar form comes out like TikTok or Twitch, they just copy their formula and pay Clip-Sharers more money to do so. It's a perfect system, and Clip-Sharers are a slave to it...they know what the algorithm favors. Hell I remember when Clip-Sharers thought they were so clever for figuring out the algorithm 😂, only to realize later that was Clip-Share's intentions for them to Feed the algorithm, ie how they prefer content is made.
Yes. I had same thoughts!
I need that normal distribution thing! It makes me feel so peaceful.
Wow, a parte que aparece o pêndulo duplo até parece o vídeo que passa no Manual Do Mundo
With this logic, is “random” really an actual thing, or just a simplification of chaotic
I learned at work that customers really do come in waves. Like yeah we will get one or two outliers who come at unpredicted times, but for the most part we know when we are going to get a rush cause yall really do show up at the same time even if you think you are going at a good time
I love learning new words, and 'deterministic' is crazy good.
I’m curious about what kinds of situations have people moving in a chaotic way. Unlike balls falling through pegs, people have intention and are influenced by those around them.
This is also an example of how quantum physics works 💡
but if you dropped one ball at a time would it still end up in the same pattern?Maybe the balls are interfering with eachother causing an interference pattern
My father used to say something philosophical based off this:"No matter the individual choices, in the end, few end up on the extremes of anything. Money, power, status, hard work, talent or anything. The most crowd is always in the average." He proceeded to give examples of coming to school, few reach half or an hour earlier, few reach half n hour later, many just make it and most arrive 5-10 mins before. No matter how less, there is always a possibility of extreme happenings.
Some individual choices can be pretty impactful. You could call it a catalyst choice, where a person's choice affect the choices of others, leading to a completely different probability, changing the average
@I once killed A man with my shoeIn conclusion, every sphere of life has been politicized, private or public. So now you can always claim someone's doing something because their politics told them so.
@I once killed A man with my shoe Those protest organizers can be sued as well and I hope he does that. Every lying scumbag politician and every celebrity, media personalities, everyone. He won the battle on the streets of Kenosha and in the court, now the real war has only started, a war in which he's the Goliath and the rest are David, only this time David will be promptly crushed. But David will try to do the same to Kim Potter. And the trial already has been tainted.
@I once killed A man with my shoe Same with Rittenhouse's and now Potter's trial. This is not justice, far from it, you have jurors and the judge being intimidated. Rittenhouse was found not guilty yet the college attendees to which Kyle used to go organized a protest, in which they go on a racist tirade, even though Kyle stopped attending it two days prior. In fact he won't even have to attend to any college, the defamation lawsuits will earn him more than enough to not have to work for the rest of his and his family's life and several generations after our miserable lives end.
@I once killed A man with my shoeSame for your highly politicized trials. There was no justice in Chauvin's case, only one political group getting what it wants, especially when a congresswoman comes to the place, where the trial is held, and incites people to destroy, burn and loot more if they don't get their way. Jurors weren't even sequestered, and then they gave interviews in which they basically admit they were intimidated, which should result in a mistrial with prejudice.
I'm not sure how well this tracks to how people make decisions but it's still kind of cool.
Weeellll..... considering the obstacles placed strategically in that game hitting the balls it is obvious the first ones in the center will drop first and faster than the ones that are far away, it is not a surprise the balls end up in a mountain's shape like. This game is a good example of how a manufacturer can make money quick. 😄
I mean, in that case nothing is truly random. Everything can be predicted of we know the initial conditions, included the behaviors and choices of individuals. We only call it random because it's practically impossible for us to know the initial conditions exactly.
"What you see as randomness is a pattern to someone else" ~ Me
Predictable Chaos is also applicable in public participation events like Markets demand and supply OR to be the very specific stock market as explained in Dow Theory
@Neon Demon u the 🤡 buddy
@Bat Man 🤡
And participation in taking vaccines. Through great market research, propaganda and coercion. Vaccine sales have reached the predicted target of 95% of the population. Through freedom of choice sales would have been only 30% with good marketing up to 70% but with grest coercion tactics, the 95% sales target has been hit. I don't know the expected sales targets for boosters. But I know the vaccines companies are placing orders with governments for 100% population coverage with governments taking the losses when the consumption rate is less than perfect 👌 predictable humanity. So easy to control by fear and propaganda
Bingo, finding the pattern where there seems to he none
That ball drop thing isn't random. The drop point is placed in the center, so the point at which the balls are allowed to fall out of are a fixed location. Resulting in a relatively predictable outcome. Had those balls been evenly spread out it would make a predictable flat-ish outcome
Someday will some of you realize that this little experiment explains the Double Slit Experiment way better than the Copenhague Interpretation
Okay so for the steel bbs, if you shift the starting point does the bell curve stay the same?
“Never let ‘em know your next move”
I work for a company that does statistical analysis and each day it amazes me how developers are able to use our software for everyday data manipulation and such. I may not always understand it but when I do, it’s 👌
As a statistican, we have a Theorem called the Central Limit Theorem that given any large number of distribution with a mean and standard deviation, you get the Normal Distribution (the dumbell shape you see in the video).