Poll

17 votes (60.71%)
3 votes (10.71%)
8 votes (28.57%)

28 members have voted

rainman
rainman
Joined: Mar 28, 2012
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1502
July 17th, 2012 at 3:51:07 AM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Wow!
That's a new one ...

Bob, you know you are going to Hell then, right? (I don't mean it as an insult, just fact, since you have not proven that God does not exist, therefore He does, and since you don't believe in Him, you are going to Hell. I am happy with my statement... Are you?)

(In case you care, the article you linked to is based on an experiment they did in CERN, that had some surprising results ... caused by a lose contact on the measuring device. The mystery has been solved a while ago).



I'm going out on a limb and going to guess if bob doesn't believe in god he would also not believe in heaven or hell. So the threat of going to hell probably wont scare him.
weaselman
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
July 17th, 2012 at 3:55:51 AM permalink
Quote: rainman

So the threat of going to hell probably wont scare him.


Well, the "threat" of statistics (or relativity) being "wrong" doesn't exactly scare me either (especially, coming from Bob). That's kinda the point.

Make some outrageous claim, and then declare that, because you like it, it is up to the opponent to prove that what you said is otter bullshit - this is a totally invincible tactics for any discussion. I haven't heard of anyone using it since I graduated kindergarten.

If he wants to be consistent though, he must admit, that he is going to Hell, whether it scares him or not, because I like my statements, and he cannot prove me wrong.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
July 17th, 2012 at 9:07:14 AM permalink
I've proved Bob wrong twice on this thread. I don't care to prove him wrong a third time (re: random walks being a "theory or supposition" and hence discardable).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
July 17th, 2012 at 1:12:40 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Wow!
That's a new one ...



Not at all, Supreme Ruler of the Universe. (may we call
you SRU?) In fact, you are one of the people who, in the
past, has screamed PROOF, and when I went to all the
trouble to supply the proof, you just ignored the thread
from then on.

Not being a total idiot, I thought, hmmm, I have no
problem with what I wrote, why should I be the one
to provide proof. Let them prove me wrong. So here
we are, I'm happy as a clam about it.

Oh, and theory isn't fact or law, its supposition. Einstein's
Theory of Relativity isn't the Law of Relavitity, is it.
Random Walk is a theory and not everybody subscribes
to it. Prove me wrong.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
mustangsally
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
  • Threads: 25
  • Posts: 2463
July 17th, 2012 at 1:50:24 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob


Random Walk is a theory and not everybody subscribes
to it. Prove me wrong.

A Random Walk, either a one, two or three dimensions is not a theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_walk
"A random walk is a mathematical formalisation of a trajectory that consists of taking successive random steps"

"Random walks... serve as a fundamental model for the recorded stochastic activity."

"Several properties of random walks, including dispersal distributions, first-passage times and encounter rates, have been extensively studied."

when p=q=0.5
"How many times will a random walk cross a boundary line if permitted to continue walking forever?
A simple random walk on Z will cross every point an infinite number of times."

No proof needed.
Other great mathematicians have beat us to it.

Sally
I Heart Vi Hart
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
July 17th, 2012 at 2:00:00 PM permalink
Quote: mustangsally

A Random Walk, either a one, two or three dimensions is not a theory.



Google Random Walk Theory and you'll get 790,000
results like this:

World English Dictionary
random walk theory
n
stock exchange the theory that the future movement
of share prices does not reflect past movements and
therefore will not follow a discernible pattern


Of course its a theory, its certainly not a law, like
some of Newton's Law's. There's a reason for that..
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
weaselman
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
July 17th, 2012 at 2:13:56 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Not at all, Supreme Ruler of the Universe. (may we call
you SRU?)



It is Supreme Master of the Universe, pay attention, will you?
I consider it a personal insult when people are being so disrespectful as to refer to me by a title that is different from my wishes that I have made so painfully clear earlier.


Quote:

In fact, you are one of the people who, in the
past, has screamed PROOF, and when I went to all the
trouble to supply the proof, you just ignored the thread
from then on.


I am a bit shy to ask ... but ... ummm ... do you have any proof of that by some chance? (in a form of a link to the thread, perhaps)
In general, if I "ignore" a thread, it must be for one of two reasons - either I am satisfied with the discussion, and have nothing more to add, or it dropped off the "Recent Threads" list on the front page (and I almost never look at any threads that are not there).
Whatever the reason with the particular thread you are referring to, I don't understand what is your problem with it either way. Do you need my validation so desperately, that feel incomplete without seeing my reply to something you posted? In that case I apologize. If you ever find me "ignoring" one of your posts again, that is awaiting my input, please feel free to drop me a PM with a link, and I will be sure to respond.




Quote:

Not being a total idiot, I thought, hmmm, I have no
problem with what I wrote, why should I be the one
to provide proof.


You should not, unless you actually care about anyone taking what you wrote seriously. It's ok if you don't, but in that case, why bother to write anything at all?

Quote:

Let them prove me wrong. So here
we are, I'm happy as a clam about it.


Except, you are going to Hell. Prove me wrong.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
mustangsally
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
  • Threads: 25
  • Posts: 2463
July 17th, 2012 at 2:28:42 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Google Random Walk Theory and you'll get 790,000
results like this:

World English Dictionary
random walk theory
n
stock exchange the theory that the future movement
of share prices does not reflect past movements and
therefore will not follow a discernible pattern


Of course its a theory, its certainly not a law, like
some of Newton's Law's. There's a reason for that..

Oh, I see your angle!
Twist and Shout!
Ahhhhh, AAhhhhhhh, AAAhhhhhhhhhh, AAAAhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, Shake it up Baby now


All here talk about a "Random Walk" but all "Random Walks" to you are just a "Random Walk Theory"

You are now mixing the two together and calling all random walks the same because of a stock market random walk model.
You say "Random Walk" and "Random Walk Theory" are both the same thing?

If you do, You are quite alone in your universe.
I Heart Vi Hart
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
July 17th, 2012 at 2:41:16 PM permalink
Quote: mustangsally


You are now mixing the two together and calling all random walks the same



All random walks ARE theory and you know it. They
aren't law, therefore they're theory. Look up Law of
Random Walks or random walk law and you won't
find bupkis. Being theory, random walks are not
subscribed to by everybody, you know this also.

Its just convenient to use them to prove a point
you can't prove any other way.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
July 17th, 2012 at 2:43:31 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman


I am a bit shy to ask ... but ... ummm ... do you have any proof of that by some chance? .



You want me to search threads over a year old so
I can prove it? So you can ignore me yet again?
Not likely, SMU..
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal

  • Jump to: