Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
probability does not change. The bayesian probability will change as a new information comes in. If I continue flipping that same coin over and over the results will change the bayesian probability which will gradually approach the true probability (but might never quite reach it)
To put it simply if I can keep getting heads then I will start expecting to see heads
But even after a thousand heads there is still a very tiny possibility that I just got lucky 1000 times
The bayesian probability is the degree to which you expect something
Bayesian probability is one interpretation of the concept of probability. In contrast to interpreting probability as frequency or propensity of some phenomenon, Bayesian probability is a quantity that is assigned to represent a state of knowledge, or a state of belief.
Bayesian probability is the degree to which you expect to something
I KNOW with certainty that a 2 headed coin will come up heads if flipped.
If the coin has a heads and a tails then I dont know what it will come up as but I KNOW the probability is 50/50.
If I have 3 coins in my pocket, one with 2 heads, another with 2 tails, and another with one head and one tail and I pull one out at random and, without looking at it, flip it then I dont know the true probability for that particular coin (which could be 0 or 50 or 100 percent) but I still KNOW the a priori bayesian probability for that particular coin is 50/50.
If I continue flipping that particular coin and observing the results then the Bayesian probability for that particular coin will gradually change and approach the true probability for that particular coin.
Put simply if I keep getting heads then I will start expecting to see heads. But even after a thousand heads there is still a very small chance that I just got lucky 1000 times.
Most scientist believe that there is life on other solar system but there is no empirical evidence that there is because we cannot travel to other solar systems.
No. Rather.... Due the lack of empirical evidence, scientists do not know whether or not there is life in other parts of the solar system but most believe that the possibility of that being so is quite high.
if they knew there was life there or if they knew the true probability then they wouldnt need beliefs (bayesian probability)
Since neither of those is known the only thing left is bayesian probability
I got curious about this Bayesian probability about God, one person wrote a book giving it a 67% probability, another person stated it was a very bias way to determine the question and he then calculated a 2% probability and the rest I looked at just dismissed Bayesian probability from being of any use for that wuestion.
Granpa has provided zero proof for his 50% and keeps insisting that Bayesian probability is a belief system it would be interesting if he could submit his mathematical proofs to back either of his positions.
Most scientist believe that there is life on other solar system but there is no empirical evidence that there is because we cannot travel to other solar systems.
Well most scientists are humans, and thus have opinions on things they can't know. Everyone has opinions. Yes, even scientists can fall for the Zeitgeisty Reza Aslan regressive leftist lies and deceit, but most opinions by scientists around things we haven't discovered are logical even when they lack evidence.
The atheists on here are saying that with the God question there are no examples to go by, so it's weaker than say life on other planets. We have life here, so therefore there could be life elsewhere. Since there are no examples of any gods anywhere, we must assume naturalistic origins until the evidence points elsewhere.
if they knew there was life there or if they knew the true probability then they wouldnt need beliefs (bayesian probability)
Since neither of those is known the only thing left is bayesian probability
You are falling into the usual theist trap of ignoring any secondary or relative evidence and making it a 'believe or not' question.
belief ranges from 0 to 100%
that was the whole point
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
