Thread Rating:

rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
March 17th, 2014 at 6:41:32 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

You have no idea what "memoryless" means.



Seriously. There must be a Delorean involved here somewhere, right? How could anyone/anything have a memory of the future?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
Gamblor
Gamblor
Joined: Mar 13, 2014
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 93
March 17th, 2014 at 6:42:26 PM permalink
Paigow1986,

Thanks for your valuable input. I will check out your thread for sure. While they may be very smart with numbers, using the percentage sign on the correct side of the number, math does not equal reality. That is the basis of mathematicians fallacy. The world is flawed. No one answered why on paper we can't travel faster than light, but on the other hand we have quantum entanglement. I'm going to go read those paradox articles. Thanks again for your post.
24Bingo
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1348
March 17th, 2014 at 6:44:22 PM permalink
Quote: paigow1986

btw guys, just for gigs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%27s_paradox

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox

but what do those guys know? you guys are WAY smarter!



Um... what?
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
March 17th, 2014 at 6:44:48 PM permalink
Quote: paigow1986

gamblor: while I do not agree with everything you're saying, I absolutely see where you're coming from. im only commenting on this board because it irritates me to see the people on this forum berate anyone who has something to say contrary to what they believe. if it wasn't for people like me and gamblor, what would come of this website? it would be dull, boring, and you guys would have no one to insult and be condescending towards.



No, it would be a great place where we could discuss gambling topics without having to explain high school math to people.

Quote:

if you want, go and read my thread started under the "gambling" section called "BIG QUESTION REGARDING INCREASING ODDS/NEED MATHEMATICIANS". I basically asked them all if my EV would increase in the slightest bit if I was able to play more than 1 hand of pai gow/uth (bonus' only).



Yes. You asked, got an answer, and then insisted that the answer was wrong.

Quote:

example: rather than playing 1 hand at $30, I want to play 6 hands at $5.. I was expecting to get some educated answers, and was hoping to see mike "the wizard" give his input, but all I got were these unemployed "mathematicians" spewing trash. they are all telling me that it does not change your EV or your chances of making more money in the long run, and EVERYTHING stays the same. I started with $50 2 years ago, and im up more than $10,000 after playing more than 100,000 hands, im not saying I have an edge, im saying my odds of winning of winning money/EV goes up A FRACTION OF A PERCENT,



And you are wrong. You don't even understand the words that you are using.

You may very well have an edge, BTW. It does not take many dealer errors to make UTH a +EV game. I have played this game with an edge before. I know someone who played with a very big edge and made a lot of money this way.

Quote:

and all the sheep would gather together and let me know how much of an idiot I was for thinking such a thing. and that the reason the casino doesn't let you play more than one hand is ONLY because you can use "information from other hands", an utter joke.



Casinos generally let you play more than one hand in games where they can easily protect against you swapping cards between the hands. In UTH, the information from other hands is not worth much, and people share it anyway. If they don't let you play more than 1 it is probably mostly for game protection reasons. You can touch the cards with both hands, and a skilled sleight-of-hand artist could easily swap cards between hands and probably not get caught.

Quote:

btw guys, just for gigs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%27s_paradox

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox

but what do those guys know? you guys are WAY smarter!



Do you understand either of these? In what way do you think that they are relevant?
gpac1377
gpac1377
Joined: Apr 7, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 676
March 17th, 2014 at 7:08:03 PM permalink
Quote: Gamblor

No one answered why on paper we can't travel faster than light, but on the other hand we have quantum entanglement.


Again from the Rational Wiki:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

Quote:

<Quantum entanglement> has some use in quantum computing and teleportation, although it cannot be used to violate the law that information and energy cannot exceed the speed of light.


Quote:

In order to send information, you'd first have to encode some information into the system first, which would destroy the entanglement. Without the entanglement, there is no mechanism to send the info faster than light! Thus, you can't send information vast distances faster than light, no matter how much quantum woo merchants and science fiction authors may say otherwise.

"Scientists tell us that the fastest animal on earth, with a top speed of 120 feet per second, is a cow that has been dropped out of a helicopter."
Gamblor
Gamblor
Joined: Mar 13, 2014
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 93
March 17th, 2014 at 7:28:57 PM permalink
Quote: gpac1377

Again from the Rational Wiki:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement



Try again.
For example, if a pair of particles is generated in such a way that their total spin is known to be zero, and one particle is found to have clockwise spin on a certain axis, then the spin of the other particle, measured on the same axis, will be found to be counterclockwise. Because of the nature of quantum measurement, however, this behavior gives rise to effects that can appear paradoxical: any measurement of a property of a particle can be seen as acting on that particle (e.g. by collapsing a number of superimposed states); and in the case of entangled particles, such action must be on the entangled system as a whole. It thus appears that one particle of an entangled pair "knows" what measurement has been performed on the other, and with what outcome, even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances.

Experiments have been performed involving measuring the polarization or spin of entangled particles in different directions, which by producing violations of Bell's inequality demonstrate statistically that the local realist view cannot be correct. This has been shown to occur even when the measurements are performed more quickly than light could travel between the sites of measurement:

THIS IS IMPORTANT--

Recent experiments have measured entangled particles within less than one part in 10,000 of the light travel time between them.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
Gamblor
Gamblor
Joined: Mar 13, 2014
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 93
March 17th, 2014 at 7:34:04 PM permalink
If that's not getting owned I don't know what is. I rest my case your honor. Mathematicians Fallacy will hereby be know as a "real thing".
gpac1377
gpac1377
Joined: Apr 7, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 676
March 17th, 2014 at 7:42:38 PM permalink
Why don't we quote all the way to the end of the paragraph?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

Quote:

This has been shown to occur even when the measurements are performed more quickly than light could travel between the sites of measurement: there is no lightspeed or slower influence that can pass between the entangled particles.[6] Recent experiments have measured entangled particles within less than one part in 10,000 of the light travel time between them.[7] According to the formalism of quantum theory, the effect of measurement happens instantly.[8][9] It is not possible, however, to use this effect to transmit classical information at faster-than-light speeds[10] (see Faster-than-light → Quantum mechanics).


Here's the link for "Faster than light":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light#Quantum_mechanics
"Scientists tell us that the fastest animal on earth, with a top speed of 120 feet per second, is a cow that has been dropped out of a helicopter."
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
March 17th, 2014 at 7:44:04 PM permalink
Quote: gpac1377

Why don't we quote all the way to the end of the paragraph?



Hmm...if that's not getting owned, I don't know what is...:-)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
gpac1377
gpac1377
Joined: Apr 7, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 676
March 17th, 2014 at 7:49:07 PM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

Hmm...if that's not getting owned, I don't know what is...:-)


I actually have no idea what I'm talking about :(

But of course neither does the OP.
"Scientists tell us that the fastest animal on earth, with a top speed of 120 feet per second, is a cow that has been dropped out of a helicopter."

  • Jump to: