Posted by Pohl on November 24, 1998 at 22:37:08:
In Reply to: misunderstand posted by Xavier on November 23, 1998 at 09:15:41:
: : : Using figures as you did in your post is very misleading. If you use your method, and under your criteria, then it's impossible for you to exist. A man produces about 12 trillion sperm during his lifetime, see:
: : : http://www.innerbody.com/text/repo10.html
: : Let me give you an example. Say I flip a coin three times. Say it is tails all three times. The odds are 1 in 8 that these three events would ever occur. By adding more and more events you get greater odds. And these odds are true. But they are for multiple events.
: : But my odds were for just one event, not more than one event.
: : Now if you multiply the odds for all the multiple events, then of course you will come up with a number such as you did per the multiplication rule < (P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B) whereas A and B are independent events> . But the multiplication rule is only for more than one event.
: : My odds were for just one event. If I had done what you did and including several events, my odds would have been for more than one event, the odds would square for each additional event, and not prove my point.
: : Do you see the distinction?
: : P.S. The actual odds of a sperm creating a birth are 1 in the number of sperm in one particular ejaculation and not 1 in the number of sperm that a male produces for an entire lifetime.
: I believe he was calculating the odds that the one sperm cell that would become you would be the one to fertilize the egg, not the odds that at least one of the trillions would reach the egg. Reread his post better.
Yes you're right, but you caught me. I just got going on my assumption and later realized I missed some of his thoughts. I left it the way it was because it just didn't make much sense his way.
For example, I'm saying, using this analogy, what are the odds of any person winning the lottery this year 100 percent because someone wins all the time throughout the year.
Then he is saying what are the odds of Linda winning the lottery this year. Now her odds could be 1 in a million.
My point is that he is comparing apples and oranges.
Another example, I say what are the odds of spontaeous generation.
He's saying, what are the odds of spontaneous generation for a molecule with a DNA pattern of bla bla bla.
Well he is comparing two different things.