"The future ain't what it used to be."

When does a coincidence, stop being a coincidence?

answer to Janus

Ingo Swan was a central charactor at SRI and if you will look through his extensive web site it will in around about way, introduce you to the rest of the gang.

Doctor Jungs books are at the library in the psychology and biography section. You could even find his nine-thousand page work on anthropology and symbolism if dig a bit deeper.
Shadow, thanks for the references. Mmm... psychic sexuality.

And, TTA, I wonder: Is the Kennedy-Lincoln 'link' still a meaningful coincidence if such a list can be drawn up for any two marginally similar historical figures? I'm willing to bet that just that could be done. That was the whole point of my numerical look at each of the points. If the event is not unlikely, it can't truly be called a coincidence, can it?
"Mmm.....psychic sexuality"

and you're done, you got all the bases covered?

You must be a super genious to cover 40 years of research in a single evening. My hats off to ya.

PS-- be carefull not to learn to much too fast, as I've heard that this can cause ones head to explode.
Shadow, did I say I'd read it all yet? No need to get so cocky, I've made no serious comments about the site contents yet.

TTA, way to avoid replying to my post.
PS I just found it funny that right under the headline 'Psychic Sexuality' was the other heading 'Penetration'. We all need our puerile humor occasionally.
I didn't know I had to reply or that I was avoiding it...

I think I said in the post to Shadow, that I couldn’t have said it better my self. So that should tell you, that he said what I wanted to say, in a manner of speaking of course =). So in a way, I did reply to you, hehe.

-Javier C.

P.S. Shadow isn't the one here showing a cocky attitude. I think you have that backwards. That's you =).

<This message has been edited by TimeTravelActivist (edited 12 July 2000).>
Hey, tit for tat. Look at the 'Old Science does...', where you nitpicked me for not responding as 'promptly' as you saw fit.

Maybe you didn't read the earlier post... I said,
"Is the Kennedy-Lincoln 'link' still a meaningful coincidence if such a list can be drawn up for any two marginally similar historical figures? I'm willing to bet that just that could be done. That was the whole point of my numerical look at each of the points. If the event is not unlikely, it can't truly be called a coincidence, can it?"

Care to respond? Or shall I assume you have no rebuttal?
How was I supposed to know that post was directed to me? If you didn't specify to who was it for?

No wait, I see it now. I didn't see my username the first time. I was in a hurry when I read it I suppose.

Next time you should make individual posts for individual people. It would stand out more. It wasn't like the last time when you took forever to respond. Cause it was plainly clear that the post was for you. Where in this case, I didn't notice my name in 1 of your paragraphs, cause I thought it was just a bunch of mumbo jumbo, and didn't care to read it (I had a very important long distance call to make =).

Next time, start the heading with my name, and I will take notice.

And as for your response of your number system. You still didn't answer my post saying, that not every case is explainable by stat analysis.

I agree with you in some way about finding some similarities with historical figures. I for example, have the same birthday as Buddha, William Woodsworth, Jackie Chang, and many more influencial people in history =). And I am also a Martial Artist, 6 ½ years, black belt.

And there's another thing I think is just about impossible. That my father and brother have the same birthday. My half- sister has the same birthday as my cousin. And my cousin's son has the same birthday as me. Oh, and I almost forgot. I have the same birthday as my great great grandfather.

There 365 days in a year. Somehow, in just 2 generations, my immediate family has now had 3 (me included) individuals with the same birthday. And I know there's more to come in the future. And that’s not taking into account my personal experiences with coincidences, and my family. I’m not the only 1.

So stats, numbers. I don't think applies to me that much =P. Maybe they do to you.

-Javier C.

<This message has been edited by TimeTravelActivist (edited 13 July 2000).>
Dirty Harry and other TV cops don't believe in 'coincidence' why should I? Then on the other hand (or in the other hand) "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

Cleverness and stupidity are such close cousins?! Don't you agree? Wich brings us I suppose, to the fourth law of logic: "THE IDENTIY OF OPPOSITES".

So I believe that I can answer TTA's question. Things are not a coincidence when they are not a coincidence (and visa versa). Mostly. in other words, you CAN'T tell the difference. Statistics merely tell us what is likely an odd chance and what is likely an information containing pattern.
TTA, okay, this is a good example I can use to illustrate to you how stats work. First I need a bit of background info, though; how many people in your immediate family (I mean, parents (step- included), siblings, and any other people you'd consider it odd to have the same birthday as (nieces, nephews, whatever))? Not anything really personal; just a number. Then, I can give you rough calculations on how likely having three birthdays the same is in that group.

And, well, stats apply to everyone. If you flip a coin, does it not come up either heads or tails?

"Cleverness and stupidity are such close cousins?! Don't you agree?"
Of course not. Cleverness implies intelligence, while stupidity implies ignorance.

As for the end of your post, you said that stats "tell us what is likely an odd chance and what is likely an information containing pattern." Is that not the same as identifying a coincidence? If not, what's the difference?
Maybe stats apply to us all in some way, but I fail to see how it could be so simplified to it being like flipping a coin (and having it be heads or tails, 1 or the other), and having it all up to chance.

What will it take Man, it's so clear to see? It's impossible for a teacup to break the same way twice.

If your stats can prove that, how it is possible to get the same breaks of a tea cup the same way twice, then you won me over for good.

But if you can't, then I’ll know that not all things are how you say they are. I already know you don't have the right path nature and life leads. Since you lack the kinds of perceptions people like me have. You must learn to see both sides to an issue. Not just 1.

Nevertheless, until then, I know that my personal life experiences tell other wise. The Gut knows, just how the nose knows =).

Any way’s, I have 2 brothers and sisters, and 2 half- brothers and sisters. And only 4 cousins, all female. I guess now I shall wait to see how your stat analysis somehow justifies these possibilities of having the same birthday. Can't wait to hear your explanation =). Haha.

Javier C.
Ok, try this on for size. I was just asked to verify someone's appointment. A special case. This person has the same birthday as I do =). How's that for a trip...

-Javier C.
To my fellow scientists: Quantum Physics is a Dynamic revolution of patterns all which are involved into a system of teclucionoids shifted through the phase of time which is phased by the actions of every
inversed decision made through the existance of our lifetime. If the phase variants of the quantum implosion is altered by thermionic transconductants then the increased time distortion will cancel out to .7394 gravitational pull on the nucleoid atoms releasing various gases involving situoatide and fluxadite menatoids through the exhausts of biochemical gases. Your colleague, Dr. Doak PhD.
That's a very fascinating explanation Prof. Doak PhD.

Now can you please translate it for me in English? In terms, I can understand
. Thank you.

-Javier C.
If we say that " 'blob x' is LIKELY (to be) a beer can" have we identified it? No, truths can be indicated through statistics but stats should never be construed -as- truth.

When likelyhood approches 100% we call it actuality. This begs the question 'does 100% certainty ever exist or is it just approximated'.

This ones for you Bud "does the future become the past at the moment that a 99.99999999% probable event becomes 100% the way it is?"
Well, I don't think you could have stated the numbers in a more confusing way than you did; do you mean you have 2 brothers and 2 sisters? or just 2 siblings total? I'll assume the latter for arguments' sake. (This weakens my case - if you have more siblings, the 3 birthdays become more likely.)

So you have, in total, 3 parents + 4 siblings + 4 cousins + you = 12 people in the group where it would be 'odd' to have 3 peoples' birthdays the same. And a total of 365 days that birthday could be.

A word about notation; in stats it's most simple to express probabilities as fractions between 1 and 0, rather than percentages. By this (linear) scale, 1 is an absolute certainty, and 0 and absolute impossibility (neither of which actually exist in reality). If you still feel the need to convert a number into a percentage, just multiply by 100; thus odds of .5 are the same as 50%.

Now for the math.

Let's start with a group of 10 people all with different birthdays, and find the odds that the next two people would share one of those birthdays. This gives 10/365 that one will share the birthday, and 10/365 * 1/365 = .00007506 that the third will share the same. So far not terribly good odds - still better than the 6/49 lottery, though. But, there's more. That group of ten we started with has odds of already sharing a birthday. The odds that 10 randomly picked birthdays will all be different is 365/365 * 364/365 * 363/365 * ... * 356/365 = .8830 , which means the odds they'll already have two dates shared is .1170 and then, factoring in the two people we left out, the odds of three same birthdays is .1170 * 2/365 = .0006408 . Combining this and the previous answer, we get .0006408 + .00007506 * .8830 = .0007071 which is (1/.0007071 = 1414) roughly 1 in 1500 . Pretty decent odds for what you consider a freak occurance.

To guarantee the same odds when playing a 6/49 lottery, you would have to buy 49C6 * .0007071 = almost 10,000 tickets. In the world there are probably about 6,000,000,000 * .0007071 = 4.24 million families with the same 'coincidence' - though it can hardly be called a coincidence in the presence of such a large number of occurences. If you know about 500 people (from different families), odds are roughly (1 - .0007071)^500 = 30% that one of them will have witnessed the same 'coincidence'.

If anyone else reading this knows a bit of stats, I'd appreciate a double-check.

As for the teacup thing, well, yeah, stats says that it's extremely unlikely, almost infinitesimally likely, that a teacup would break the same way twice. The odds of each crack happening in the exact same place are overwhelmingly small. So in effect, it says that it's 'impossible' - to the degree that anything can be impossible.

It's a tough realm, applying stats to real life, because they're by nature not the easy answers we're looking for. Just because something has a 99.99999% chance of being a beer can doesn't mean it actually is one. If you want to look at it from that point of view, all reality is subjective because there's an infinitesimally small chance that everything one percieves was actually a fluke accident of the light, and never really happened. Even events in the past are not 100% certain; Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Quantum experiments have been done in which the actual physical reality of what happened to a photon is changed, after the fact, by measurement.
I see the past is an open topic yet also closed..Can we determine if the past exists? Does the past exist? Yes, coincidinces will stop being coincidinces when the pattern of nethoualagoly has performed it's course. Thenacolaty mencalosis is the count onto which the horizontel axis is angled many things rely on this to take place(that should clear things up),thanks.

<This message has been edited by Prof. Doak PhD (edited 15 July 2000).>
Janus your explanation is invalid. I didn't say my family were strangers. Duh, their my family, my blood.

Your entire explanation was on the assumption of any 10 people, being stranger having the same birthday.

You failed to answer my direct question, and to prove your case. I told you, I have 2 brothers and sisters. And 2 half brothers and sisters (step siblings). Plus 4 cousins... My brother has the same birthday as my father; my stepsister has the same birthday as my cousin. While my cousin’s son, has my birthday. And me having the same birthday as my great great grandfather.

(Can't believe you didn't understand this the first time... It's easier to understand then your posts

Want to take another crack at it?

Have a nice day,
Javier C.

<This message has been edited by TimeTravelActivist (edited 16 July 2000).>