Re: Can Events of Zero Probability Happen?

On Jan 14, 6:12 am, David C. Ullrich <ullr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:37:23 -0800 (PST), Shubee <e.Shu...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Sure, on the face of it, it seems possible to reason with a physicist
that believes that conceptualizing events that occur with zero
probability is unfathomable. The problem is, he explicitly said that
even an event of incredibly small probability can't happen.

First, if he said that why didn't you say so?

If events of zero probability can happen, then events of fantastically
small probability can happen. Didn't Oh No assert that "Zero
probability means that an event cannot happen"?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.foundations/msg/ca3eb017d60ca734

There's a big difference between that and saying
that events of zero probability can't happen.

That is correct. If I titled this thread, "Can Events of Fantastically
Small Probability Happen?" I probably wouldn't get a serious
mathematical answer and I might even be told that asking such a
fantastically stupid question doesn't belong at sci.math.

Second, again you should simply ask him a question. First ask him for
an epsilon > 0 such that an event of probability < epsilon can't
happen. Second, calculate an N such that 2^(-N) < epsilon.
Third, ask him to flip a coin N times and tell you what sequences
of heads and tails resulted. Then point out that the probability
of that sequence of heads and tails is < epsilon.

David, going that route presupposes that the physicist respects
precise and elegantly stated mathematical reasoning. The way I look at
it, I have already arrived at an apparently insolvable impasse. Didn't
Oh No make it clear that his philosophical perspective supercedes all
established mathematical understanding?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.foundations/browse_frm/thread/c4de9ae9a364fc79/

Third, no he _didn't_ say that! He said "Probabilities this low
are generally taken to mean the event could not have happened."
That's _true_.

More precisely, those are weasel words in the context of the
discussion. Definition: "A weasel word is used to avoid making a
straightforward statement. Weasel words are also used to deceive,
distract, or manipulate an audience." Weasel wording "conceals the
full picture. In this way, one may evade responsibility for what may
be inferred." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words

Please note the meaning of the physicist's whole paragraph in response
to my question:

Quantum mechanically, is there a nonzero probability for the Red Sea
to split (Exodus 14:21) and for a man to be fully formed out of the
inanimate material of the earth in a single day? (Genesis 2:7).

"Although, as in qm, when events are governed by probability, it may
be technically possible to find a non-zero probability for extremely
unlikely events, there must be some doubt about the meaning of the
mathematics. Probabilities this low are generally taken to mean the
event could not have happened."

I interpret that answer as "Yes, but." The key line is "there must be
some doubt about the meaning of the mathematics." Do you really
believe that an expert physicist can rationally justify having doubt
about the meaning of the mathematics?

Oh No's answer "Yes, but," when you mod out all the weasel words in
the whole paragraph, clearly affirms my claim that Oh No "explicitly
said that even an event of incredibly small probability can't happen."

Yes it is. Suppose I tell you that I was watching a glass
of water the other day, and with no outside energy applied
it just happened that half of it froze solid while the other
half boiled away. Would you believe me?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.foundations/msg/3d5630f2762edce6

David, thank you for bringing up this very familiar illustration in
quantum physics. You have proven my point. The accepted and widely
acknowledged answer by the experts in quantum physics is that the
event that you described can happen, although with fantastically
small, non-zero probability.

Now, please consider the meaning of this amusing curiosity. When
mainstream physicists interpret quantum physics and assert that
miraculous events can happen in a glass of water, the meaning of
fantastically small probability is not disputed. When I ask about the
quantum mechanical chances for the Red Sea to part (Exodus 14:21) and
for a man to be fully formed out of the inanimate material of the
earth in a single day (Genesis 2:7), then suddenly those events call
into question the meaning of fantastically small probabilities.

Shubee
http://www.everythingimportant.org/creationism
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Can Events of Zero Probability Happen?
    ... even an event of incredibly small probability can't happen. ... If events of zero probability can happen, ... Please note the meaning of the physicist's whole paragraph in response ... acknowledged answer by the experts in quantum physics is that the ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Incorrect use of undated sources
    ... our acceptance must be based on actual evidence. ... Plausibility leads to probability in a continuum scale. ... Does 'appearance have the meaning as in; ...
    (rec.games.mahjong)
  • Re: weakness of gravity compared to electricity
    ... >> Your hypotheses were well debunked in that original thread. ... You assign conceptual meaning to mathematical objects used in the ... contained neither the word "probability" nor "imaginary". ... off-shell particles are unreasonable. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Editor wants to help !
    ... much separate from any abusive overtones. ... part of the meaning of a word. ... probability that you're prejudiced. ... prejudice is still prejudice. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Whats the difference between the two sentences? (Using would and may/might)
    ... He would have reached New York by now. ... That's one meaning, but it could be the answer to a hypothetical question ... expresses a slightly greater probability that he has reached New York. ... Mark Brader | "Perl is a minimalist language at heart. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
Loading