| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 7:37 PM, <gottlieb@×××.edu> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Jun 28 2014, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> That doesn't matter. Take a non-negative integer N; if you flip a coin |
| 5 |
>> an infinite number of times, then the probability of the coin landing |
| 6 |
>> on the same face N times in a row is 1. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> This is certainly true. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
>> This means that it is *guaranteed* to happen |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> That is not as clear. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Let me be more precise (and please correct me if I'm wrong): It is |
| 15 |
guaranteed to happen at some point in the infinite sequence of random |
| 16 |
flip coins, but we cannot know when it will happen, only that it will |
| 17 |
happen. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
That's the way I got it when I took my probability courses, admittedly |
| 20 |
many years ago. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In any way, even if I'm wrong and it is not guaranteed, the main point |
| 23 |
remains true: the probability of getting a large sequence of the same |
| 24 |
number from a RNG is 1 for every true random RNG, and therefore seeing |
| 25 |
a large sequence of the same number form a RNG doesn't (technically) |
| 26 |
means that it is broken. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Regards. |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 31 |
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias |
| 32 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives