Wrong. A coin is more likely to land on the side that was facing down down you flipped it.
It's also more likely to land on heads, because the head is normally heavier.
Both of these are not true. The first is, on a trial by trial basis,
patently false as the chance of the coin landing on any one of two outcomes is ALWAYS 50:50. Always.
The results coming up H:H:H is not any more likely or unlike than rolling H:T:T. It is only when you consider that You're more likely to come up with a mixed set (H:H:T, H:T:H, H:T:T, T:H:H, T:H:T, T:T:H) than you are any one pure set (H:H:H, T:T:T) because there are MORE OPTIONS to throw a mixed set. Each individual outcome outlined is actually the same probability, but there are 6 mixed sets and only 2 pure sets.
And the head is not heavier than the tails side. The center of gravity of the whole apparatus is the center of rotation, not the midpoint along the edge. There is always a 50:50 chance of the coin landing on either side, since the shape of the coin only gives two outcomes and these are chosen by where the rotation of the coin was around it's center of gravity.
hen paint each other side with the same amount of mass of paint and 1 red and 1 green.and have a machine flip a coin when the coin's red and green is not facing up or down and go to a alternate reality and theirs always a flat ground and always have no air above it and gravity is always the same if you dont change your mass whenever you stand on the ground or fly, then flip a coin and then it would still not be always random.unless the reality the robot is in has a law in physics saying that fliping a coin is always random.
A coin flip is not specifically a "random" event, but a "chaotic" event. The act of flipping a coin is controlled by many very small variables, each one more specific than the last, which influence the final outcome more greatly than their proportion would otherwise indicate. This is called "sensitive dependance upon initial conditions".
If every single piece of information were to be known about the coin toss, in excrutiating detail, it would be possible to predict the coin toss. However the amount that data would have to be wrong by in order to change the outcome is exceedingly low, taking that prediction to the realm of the astronomically improbable.
All of this is similar to the random number generators in computers. The numbers are not truly random, but actually chaotic. The difference being that in the computer realm, the actual inputs to the chaotic system
can be specifically known and replicated, leading to a "seed" that can be used to achieve the same results when used in the same situation.
This is where it gets tricky tho. Although the random number generator can produce the same number twice by using the same seed in the same circumstance, there are irregularities that can occur when attempting to do this.
Try this little bit of "Science", az. Take a vanilla game. Generate a world with Seed "0". Then add a mod to your game (any mod really, doesn't so much matter). Then generate a new world with that same seed.
It will be different because the environment has changed. Each time a random number was generated it produced the same results in sequence, however, it was being placed in different places, throwing the entire sequence into a different light.
Author
Topic: Azrael300's science on seed's (Read 8364 times)