Testing random

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Jussi Piitulainen wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn writes:
>> Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn writes:
>>>>   8 3 6 3 1 2 6 8 2 1 6.
>>> 
>>> There are more than four hundred thousand ways to get those numbers
>>> in some order.
>>> 
>>> (11! / 2! / 2! / 2! / 3! / 2! = 415800)
>>
>> Fallacy.  Order is irrelevant here.
> 
> You need to consider every sequence that leads to the observed counts.

No, you need _not_, because – I repeat – the probability of getting a 
sequence of length n from a set of 9 numbers whereas the probability of 
picking a number is evenly distributed, is (1∕9)ⁿ [(1/9)^n, or 1/9 to the 
nth, for those who do to see it because of lack of Unicode support at their 
system].  *Always.*  *No matter* which numbers are in it.  *No matter* in 
which order they are.  AISB, order is *irrelevant* here.  *Completely.*

This is _not_ a lottery box; you put the ball with the number on it *back 
into the box* after you have drawn it and before you draw a new one.

> One of those sequences occurred. You don't know which.

You do not have to.

> When tossing herrings […]

Herrings are the key word here, indeed, and they are deep dark red.

> Code follows. Incidentally, I'm not feeling smart here. 

Good.  Because you should not feel smart in any way after ignoring all my 
explanations.

> [nonsense]

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.