Re: a simple(?) probability question...



On Jan 29, 6:54 pm, "Joe" <jconcor...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]


The reference:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100-year_floodhas been
cited earlier,
but on revisiting it is interesting to see the opening statement of
that article again. If you consider WIKI Encyclopedia
as a credible reference perhaps you would accept that first sentence.
It is:

"A one-hundred year flood is calculated to be the maximum level of
flood water expected to occur on average once every one hundred
years" I think the operative words "expected to occur" and "once
every" are the basis for my
previous posts.

That sentence is correct, but far from being "the basis" for your
previous posts it bears little if any resemblance to anything you have
been saying. The 100-year storm is *expected* to occur exactly once in
100 years. That is, it is assumed *on average* to occur exactly once
in 100 years. But this does not mean that it *will* occur exactly once
in 100 years. In any given 100 year period the storm may, with some
probability, actually occur zero, one, two, three etc. times. This has
all been explained before. Of course the probability of its occurring
"many" times gets increasingly tiny. Perhaps that last point is what
you didn't realise and what, amongst various other things, is
contributing to your general confusion.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: a simple(?) probability question...
    ... probability equals 1 in the elapsed time of 100 years.... ... 100 year storm has only a 63% chance of happening in 100 years would ... applying a proper model to ... The Poisson distribution does ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: ZZzzZ
    ... It is unfortunate that your posts will be responded to on the basis of ... existing emotional bias rather than on the basis of their content. ... Unfortunate that I have to resort to that. ... Oh, yes, I went toe to toe and gave at least as good ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: ZZzzZ
    ... It is unfortunate that your posts will be responded to on the basis of ... existing emotional bias rather than on the basis of their content. ... Unfortunate that I have to resort to that. ... Oh, yes, I went toe to toe and gave at least as good ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: Trend less likely
    ... > there are NO streaks or trends in future outcomes. ... > relevance to any discussion about probability at the crap table. ... > Past events (from which streaks and trends ... > Strip the fallacious content from his posts and there is no there, ...
    (rec.gambling.craps)
  • Re: => 17 Catholic High School Sluts in Pregnancy Pact <= Christian Family Values !
    ... people who post on usenet not on the basis of their posts, ... the basis of their religion, gender, ethnicity, race, and the like, ... I think the only logical conclusion is that he attacks and insults ... But does he hate Christians or is he ...
    (misc.legal)