News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The gambler's fallacy is not a fallacy?. Parent comment

Re:The gambler's fallacy is not a fallacy? by horsawlarway on Sunday April 10, 2022 @10:03AM (#30976979)
> There is no convergence happening without the infinity.

This is wrong. It takes considerably fewer flips than "infinity" to see distinct convergence here.

If the coin is truly even - you have a binomial distribution, and the probability that you are far out to either edge of that distribution (nearly all heads, or nearly all tails) is vanishingly small with just 1000 flips.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The gambler's fallacy is not a fallacy? by foerbert on Monday April 11, 2022 @08:30PM (#30997082)
Probably, yes. But it's not a guarantee until you include infinity. And that's the important distinction here.

Without any such guarantee of the larger result, all you have is a 50/50 chance for the next flip. With infinity, you can pick out a portion of the sequence with an unusual number of Tails and expect there to be an offsetting number of Heads elsewhere in the full (infinite) sequence.

[ Parent | on HN ]