Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Absence of Evidence

Expand Messages
  • Marc Cooper
    You may be right, probablity theory is very difficult, and early mathematicians did get caught up in some logical falacies such as the famous one you describe.
    Message 1 of 148 , Jul 25 2:04 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      You may be right, probablity theory is very difficult, and early mathematicians did get caught up in some logical falacies such as the famous one you describe. D'Alembert was dealing with the problem of the the likelihood of getting a heads in two tosses, different from our problem. He thought that if you tossed a coin twice it could come up H-H, T-T, or H-T. He forgot that two tosses make an ordered set, so there is a fourth possibility, T-H which yields odds of 3 out of 4 rather than his 2 out of 3. But that is a harder problem than the single coin toss.

      Marc Cooper
      Missouri State

      --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, RUSSELLGMIRKIN@... wrote:
      >
      >
      > And yet at the dawn of probability theory the mathematician D'Alembert
      > thought that the probability that a coin would come up heads at least once in
      > two coin tosses was 2/3, since the three possibilities were that it would
      > come up once, twice, or not at all..
      >
      > Russell Gmirkin
      >
      > It is very simple to calculate the odds of a fair coin falling heads up,
      > 50%. It doesn't matter how many previous coin tosses you have made or how
      > they turned out, the odds are always 50%.
      >
      >
      >
      > **************A bad credit score is 600 & below. Checking won't affect your
      > score. See now!
      > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222585106x1201462830/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgI
      > D=62&bcd=JulyBadfooterNO62)
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Lisbeth S. Fried
      Hi David, I’ve seen it argued that it is not Darius, but a Saitic king, and Darius just added his name. I don’t have the references with me now, as I’m
      Message 148 of 148 , Aug 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi David,

        I’ve seen it argued that it is not Darius, but a Saitic king, and Darius just added his name.

        I don’t have the references with me now, as I’m in Israel at the WCJS.

        All the best,

        Liz

        Ann Arbor, and Jerusalem



        _____

        From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Lorton
        Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 11:34 PM
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Persian Empire





        -----Original Message-----
        >From: Clark Whelton <cwhelton@mindspring <mailto:cwhelton%40mindspring.com> .com>
        >Sent: Jul 30, 2009 11:34 PM
        >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        >Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Persian Empire

        >Liz wrote:
        >>>>>>>>>...Take Egypt for example. Where are the Persian period temples or
        >>>>>>>>>artifacts?
        >Well, we have an occasional statue of Darius, but not much>

        Let's not forget the temple of Hibis. Throughout the temple, we see Darius, dressed as an Egyptian pharaoh and identified by name in his cartouches.

        >Clark writes:
        >
        >I think there was a Persian Empire, but as things stand now it's mostly a
        >literary construct. With so little material evidence it's only a matter of
        >time until the Persian Empire shares the peculiar fate of the Medes,
        >celebrated in Greek sources but absent in the ground, even in their Iranian
        >homeland. The chronology of the ANE is trying to tell us something. The
        >third and second millennia are rich in archaeological finds -- Sumerians,
        >Old Babylonians, Mitanni, the New Kingdom, Mycenaeans. But the first
        >millennium has nothing for the Chaldeans, little for the empire Persians,
        >nothing for the Medes, little for pre-Ptolemaic Egypt, and a Dark Age in
        >pre-Hellenic Greece. What's wrong with this picture?

        Mr. Whelton raises this question of the lack of Persian strata in Mesopotamia every year or so. It's always thoroughly answered . . . but then he raises it again. And now the question, "What's wrong with this picture?" Why should we think anything is wrong with the picture? And if Mr. Whelton thinks he has an answer to his question, would he kindly share it?

        David Lorton
        Baltimore, MD





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.