/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13959600

88KiB, 420x420, cbe.gif

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 20:58:55 2021 No.13959600 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13959696 >>13959989 >>13960019 >>13960086 >>13960916 >>13961510

occam's razor is a fallacy. it assumes independent probability distributions when there is no basis for it. inb4 seething midwits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 21:09:04 No.13959637 Report

Quoted By:

You only want replies from other retarded anons?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 21:28:19 No.13959696 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959600
Was this nonsense post written by a bot?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 21:34:43 No.13959717 Report

Quoted By: >>13959883 >>13960025

i literally have no idea what you are implying. occam's razor has nothing to do with probability

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 22:29:18 No.13959883 Report

Quoted By: >>13959945

>>13959717
it has everything to do with it. the whole reason why the most parsimonious explanation is probably true is because the intersection of independent probabilities vanish to 0 when the number of events go to infinity. but they all have to be independent for this to be true.
$\lim_{N\to\infty}\bigcap_{n=1}^N\Pr(X_n)=0$
for dependent you need to consider the conditional probability. A may require B to even be around.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 22:48:06 No.13959945 Report

Quoted By: >>13959947

>>13959883
>the whole reason why the most parsimonious explanation is probably true is because the intersection of independent probabilities vanish to 0 when the number of events go to infinity
wrong

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 22:48:47 No.13959947 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959945
no u

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:04:10 No.13959989 Report

Quoted By: >>13959999

>>13959600
why do you keep posting these threads? i unironically agree with you but not because of any mathematical justification. it's just obvious that the simplest explanation isn't always the most predictive or complete.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:08:30 No.13959999 Report

Quoted By: >>13960006 >>13960011 >>13960016

>>13959989
>it's just obvious that the simplest explanation isn't always the most predictive or complete
this is not occams razor

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:10:40 No.13960006 Report

Quoted By: >>13960012

>>13959999
dem wrong digits
>Occam's razor, Ockham's razor, Ocham's razor (Latin: novacula Occami), also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony (Latin: lex parsimoniae), is the problem-solving principle that "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity",[1][2]

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:13:25 No.13960011 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959999
>Occam's razor, Ockham's razor, Ocham's razor (Latin: novacula Occami), also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony (Latin: lex parsimoniae), is the problem-solving principle that "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity",[1][2] sometimes inaccurately paraphrased as "the simplest explanation is usually the best one."[3]
ok fine. then the midwit's conception of occam's razor is the wrong one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:13:30 No.13960012 Report

Quoted By: >>13960016 >>13960017

>>13960006
>entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity
and he said
>the simplest explanation isn't always the most predictive or complete.
Maybe you're illiterate and don't understand the definition of necessity?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:14:49 No.13960016 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959999
>>13960012
don't care. i don't do philosophy. try again next time tranny.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:15:01 No.13960017 Report

Quoted By:

>>13960012
i was mistaken by the definition. in any event, i deboonked the midwit conception of occam's razor. making midwits seethe was all i was after.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO amirrorandablackhole.jpg, 214KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:15:22 No.13960019 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959600
Brother you need to understand that you don't exist in a world of infinite possibility, at this moment in time.

Our world, as we know it today, adheres to a finite set of rules.

There is no basis for your infinite probability rainbow.

The concept of infinity can exist here, but a practical representation of it, can not.

Distributions can be assumed to be, as they are observed.

All science, can only be assumed based on observations that are not assumptions.

Sorry, but your refutation of Occam's Razor is not founded in reality.

You are correct in fantasy, only.

El Arcón

El Arcón Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:15:48 No.13960021 Report

Quoted By:

It can't be a fallacy because it's not an argument.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:16:14 No.13960025 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959717
Occam's razor can be pseudo formalized as a statement in Bayesian probability. It's bullshit though because in the end you're relying on the fallacy of pulling probabilities out of your ass merely as a measure of subjective belief.

El Arcón

El Arcón Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:17:08 No.13960028 Report

Quoted By: >>13960087 >>13960810

A line segment is a practical representation of infinity. It represents an infinite number of points.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:32:36 No.13960086 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959600
>occam's razor is a fallacy
yes, an informal """"fallacy,"""" aka, a rhetorical device

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:33:04 No.13960087 Report

Quoted By: >>13960160

>>13960028
>A line segment is a practical representation of infinity. It represents an infinite number of points.
Bullshit, no such thing as a point with no dimensions
A point contains all dimensions, everything else are just cuts from this unity

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:52:46 No.13960160 Report

Quoted By: >>13960185

>>13960087
>Bullshit, no such thing as a point with no dimensions
imagine looking like a brainlet in front of Tooker
A regular point, placed in a 2D plane, has dimension 0. read a book!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Dec 2021 23:59:11 No.13960185 Report

Quoted By: >>13960400

>>13960160
>A regular point, placed in a 2D plane
it'a called a circle you idioy

>has dimension 0.
dimensions zero means the thing has no dimensions, hence it doesnt exist

>read a book!
you can put anything in a book

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 00:53:48 No.13960389 Report

Quoted By:

G(x) exists. this makes the atheist brainlet seethe

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 00:57:09 No.13960400 Report

Quoted By: >>13960432

>>13960185
>thing has no dimensions, hence it doesn't exist
You when you put it that way, perhaps time and gravity don't exist. Perhaps there's a different explanation. How would life survive if it was missing senses for additional dimensions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 01:05:24 No.13960432 Report

Quoted By:

>>13960400
>perhaps time and gravity don't exist
define either without a vector

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 03:11:45 No.13960810 Report

Quoted By: >>13960845

>>13960028
Show me a line that contains an infinite number of points, and I'll show you a line that consists of a limited number of subatomic particles.

It is not a practical representation.

It's an approximate representation, calling it practical is a misnomer because it is not comprehensive.

There is no comprehensive representation of infinity within our known Universe, except MAYBE time.

We have no idea if time is infinite.

As of right now, we're so stupid we don't have a supposition for the finite/infinite state of time, (with any reasonable evidence) but our scientists still put a fucking "start date" on the existence of the observable Universe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 03:21:35 No.13960845 Report

Quoted By: >>13960900

>>13960810
a line is an abstract object, it's not discretized by physical particles.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 03:51:29 No.13960900 Report

Quoted By: >>13960972

>>13960845
No shit?

abstract:

1. existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

Well as long as your "practical representations" of infinity are "abstract" they're not very fucking real, now are they?

Infinity is the imaginary friend of mathematics.

It literally does not exist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 03:58:30 No.13960916 Report

Quoted By: >>13961798

>>13959600
Only midwits ever mention occams razor to begin with. Dumb people get giddy when they discover logical fallacies because they are too stupid to argue their point. Looking for a contrived gotcha is the best they can hope for. Not that logical fallacies arent a thing but half wits dont understand them or how to apply them and if you need some formal "rule" or definition to explain to you how the shit someone is saying is retarded, then you are also retarded

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 04:23:33 No.13960972 Report

Quoted By: >>13960979

>>13960900
thoughts are real. may be the only thing that we know really exist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 04:27:01 No.13960979 Report

Quoted By: >>13960982

>>13960972
Any individual person's thoughts are real to them.

I have no way to tell if your thoughts are real.

You probably don't have a way to tell if my thoughts are real, unless my massively complex thought experiment worked that gave you the ability to read my mind.

In which case, why is utopia taking so long? :P

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 04:28:09 No.13960982 Report

Quoted By:

>>13960979
this is true.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 10:02:49 No.13961510 Report

Quoted By:

>>13959600
Well it's not a logical rule, it's a rule of thumb with some very vague frequentist underpinning.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1633261993633.jpg, 17KiB, 400x352

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 12:13:59 No.13961798 Report

Quoted By: >>13961931

>>13960916
This!

But its astonishing how many [[[smart]]] people fall for it
https://youtu.be/VrPhZWoaVHw

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Dec 2021 13:09:25 No.13961931 Report

Quoted By:

>>13961798
just like the idiot pinker. What is more parsimonious? That a man who was a Mossad agent using underage prostitutes to blackmale some of the most powerful men in the world killed himself in a suicide proof setting while countless events made it conveniently untraceable or that someone was paid to kill him while guards were paid to assist him?

What a hack jew

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches