cielo
11-21-2004, 10:45 PM
Intro. I was watching "the day after tomorrow" last night and it was stated something like, "Your odds of dieing in a plane crash are 1 in a billion". A few planes go down in the movie (sorry for the spoiler) and someone says, "So much for 1 in a billion". This got me thinking...For math enthusiasts/experts (i am not one):
We can say a priori (before experience) that the odds of rolling a six on a six sided die is one in six right? Because we know that the likelihood of each side landing up is even (there is nothing we see or suspect of making the 6 come up more or less often).
What about flying in a plane/getting in a car crash etc? We can't measure the odds a priori as with a die. So we establish odds based on #of plane crashes/ # of plane flights, correct? Are these odds, since they are based on empirical data and math, not purely mathematical calculatins, referred to/named differently in probability theory? Are they considered less or slightly less reliable by probability theorists? Are there any sites you know of that discuss this distinction with greater insight? Thanks
cielo
We can say a priori (before experience) that the odds of rolling a six on a six sided die is one in six right? Because we know that the likelihood of each side landing up is even (there is nothing we see or suspect of making the 6 come up more or less often).
What about flying in a plane/getting in a car crash etc? We can't measure the odds a priori as with a die. So we establish odds based on #of plane crashes/ # of plane flights, correct? Are these odds, since they are based on empirical data and math, not purely mathematical calculatins, referred to/named differently in probability theory? Are they considered less or slightly less reliable by probability theorists? Are there any sites you know of that discuss this distinction with greater insight? Thanks
cielo