I think the point is not how quickly can someone Google it but can he actually explain it, because he brought it up in a situation where it doesn’t apply, meaning he doesn’t actually understand it (ie can’t explain it).
Canconda’s original comment did not have the wiki link which is why I replied. Honestly, dropping 23 possible birthday pairs to reach >50% probability is still not intuitive to me.
Of my OG friend group of ~12 there are two matching birthday pairs. One coincidental and one pair of twins which don’t count.
With the first person, you have 1/365 chance the birthday will be on any given day.
Each person you add to that adds not just another person but also another day that can be a match.
After two people, you still don’t have a match but now you have two days. The third person can match either of those. That’s a lower bar than person #2 had to meet.
By the time the 15th person walks in, the question is: “what are the odds that you share any of these 15 days as your birthday.” And remember, it’s not that that person’s odds are 50%. It’s everything from the original 1/365 chance on up to that fifteenth person, cumulatively, that has a 50% change of a hit.
See how this already sounds a little more likely than just narrowing in on the final final result
of two people having the same birthday? The way the problem is phrased makes it sounds like more of a bullseye than it truly is.
So I think part of it is just difficult to grasp intuitively, but it’s also phrased deliberately to throw off your intuition.
Hello - the birthday problem is interesting but it has no bearing on a simple percentage probability. The reason the odds of two people having the same birthday don’t rise linearly with the number of people is that every time you add someone to the set you also add a new possible birthday to match. You get to compare them to every other member of the group for a chance to match. You’re not just adding 1/365 each time, trying over and over to hit one date. You’re adding new dates to hit as you go.
This doesn’t apply in a simple probability like “0.6% of people have a micropenis so if you know 300 people, odds are you know one.” You really are just adding 0.6 every time you consider one more person in the set.
Probability is bullshit. If you have 23 people in a room the chances of 2 of them having the same birthday are mathematically 50%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
edit: I keep forgetting you can’t make jokes without explaining them to redditors.
I even italicized “mathematic” out of reverence.
No saving y’all.
Can you explain the math?
Wiki Birthday Problem
I think the point is not how quickly can someone Google it but can he actually explain it, because he brought it up in a situation where it doesn’t apply, meaning he doesn’t actually understand it (ie can’t explain it).
Canconda’s original comment did not have the wiki link which is why I replied. Honestly, dropping 23 possible birthday pairs to reach >50% probability is still not intuitive to me.
Of my OG friend group of ~12 there are two matching birthday pairs. One coincidental and one pair of twins which don’t count.
To grasp it intuitively, I think of it like this.
With the first person, you have 1/365 chance the birthday will be on any given day.
Each person you add to that adds not just another person but also another day that can be a match.
After two people, you still don’t have a match but now you have two days. The third person can match either of those. That’s a lower bar than person #2 had to meet.
By the time the 15th person walks in, the question is: “what are the odds that you share any of these 15 days as your birthday.” And remember, it’s not that that person’s odds are 50%. It’s everything from the original 1/365 chance on up to that fifteenth person, cumulatively, that has a 50% change of a hit.
See how this already sounds a little more likely than just narrowing in on the final final result of two people having the same birthday? The way the problem is phrased makes it sounds like more of a bullseye than it truly is.
So I think part of it is just difficult to grasp intuitively, but it’s also phrased deliberately to throw off your intuition.
I can see it kinda. At the same time you are reducing the unique dates and increasing the people you could match with.
I can’t because probability is bullshit lol.
Damn you guys have no sense of humour.
If that was your idea of a joke, I’m afraid you have no idea what’s funny. More likely you are just attempting to laugh off your embarrassment.
Buddy if you tell jokes to make other people laugh… sorry that sucks. Wouldn’t’ wish that on my worst enemy.
I’m lmao and y’all are shitting bricks about math
You suck at math and we are lmao at your attempts to hide it.
THATS THE JOKE!!!
you daft ass mf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
Very easy to google ngl.
Hello - the birthday problem is interesting but it has no bearing on a simple percentage probability. The reason the odds of two people having the same birthday don’t rise linearly with the number of people is that every time you add someone to the set you also add a new possible birthday to match. You get to compare them to every other member of the group for a chance to match. You’re not just adding 1/365 each time, trying over and over to hit one date. You’re adding new dates to hit as you go.
This doesn’t apply in a simple probability like “0.6% of people have a micropenis so if you know 300 people, odds are you know one.” You really are just adding 0.6 every time you consider one more person in the set.
So… your comment is bullshit.
Damn must suck to be born without a sense of sarcasm.
Oh I was born with one of those. Also a bullshit detector, which is going off at your “I was joking” defense.