Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:44:59 02/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 09, 2002 at 17:45:50, Dan Andersson wrote: >Sorry to hear that. But it's mathematical statistics. And you clearly don't get >the gist of it. I did not say that you where wrong, merely that you had not >demonstrated sufficient reasoning. And telling someone you don't know he doesn't >know math can be dangerous. Especially if he has had perfect grades in it from >kindergarten to post-college. > >MvH Dan Andersson I did not talk about you personally. I said that I did not understand what you want because your post was not clear for me. Here is your post again with some comments to explain what is not clear. >Sorry that doesn't cut it. You have to show that for an infinite number of games >played there will be a finite number of non won games. Infinite number of games can get more than one meaning. It can be countable number of games that means the number of games is the same as the natural numbers and it can be non countable number of games(for example number of games that is the same as the number of the real numbers). If you take countable number of games there will be 0 number of infinite games with probability 1. If you take non countable number of games than I cannot say it. I am not going to prove these claims here and I assume that they are clear for everyone who knows mathematics You can't look at one >game. Unless you can show that all games end. Then the finite number will be >zero. That the probability for a game ending goes to unity only shows that a >finite limit to the number of infinite games exist. > >MvH Dan Andersson It seems that part of your "." are not the end of the sentence. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.