"Originally posted by Verasace
You will see similair results no matter how many times you run the analysis, and no matter where you start your count from as long as you have a high number of throws (random numbers)
What you're graphing is called a "one-dimensional random walk." You'll only obtain 50% heads and 50% tails in the limit as your sample size approaches infinity. This is the definition of probability.
So the overall odds are 50/50, but again, those odds are relevant upon where you are on the wave.
"Wrong. The probability is exactly 50%, all the time, as defined above. If you had an infinite sample, you'd have exactly 50% heads and 50% tails. This does not mean that any finite sample will have 50% heads and 50% tails, however. Naturally, as your sample size decreases down to one sample, it obviously is either 100% heads or 100% tails."
You will see similair results no matter how many times you run the analysis, and no matter where you start your count from as long as you have a high number of throws (random numbers)
What you're graphing is called a "one-dimensional random walk." You'll only obtain 50% heads and 50% tails in the limit as your sample size approaches infinity. This is the definition of probability.
So the overall odds are 50/50, but again, those odds are relevant upon where you are on the wave.
"Wrong. The probability is exactly 50%, all the time, as defined above. If you had an infinite sample, you'd have exactly 50% heads and 50% tails. This does not mean that any finite sample will have 50% heads and 50% tails, however. Naturally, as your sample size decreases down to one sample, it obviously is either 100% heads or 100% tails."
Annoying Precision