Hi Steve
The chances of drawing a glass without any marked molecules is 1/1000,
supporting ES's claim.
I don't think the maths works quite that way. Some glasses would have
exactly 1000 molecules, some would have 1000 -/+ 1, or 2 .. -/+999.
Presuming that the distribution is a normal
sarbajit roy wrote:
Hi Steve
" The chances of
drawing a glass without any marked molecules is 1/1000, supporting ES's
claim."
I don't think the maths works quite that way. Some glasses would have
exactly 1000 molecules, some would have 1000 -/+ 1, or 2 .. -/+999.
Presuming that the
On Apr 27, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
How about whale piss from Moby Dick? Any of that in the glass of water (a
little harder to detect)?
It should be easy to detect, since whale piss is made of the radioactive
element Urineium :-)
Sorry, everybody: somehow I pressed the send button, when I meant to save it
for further thought. The last sentence is just nuts.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University (nthomp...@clarku.edu)
Nick -
I read it through before seeing your retraction. As you may recognize
by now, your fallacy is probably not a consequence of your being an
English (Psychology?) Major but actually just not reading the statement
of the problem carefully enough. The 10^24 (molecules) vs the 10^21
glasses
