344:
323:
222:
243:
191:
639:
a book, surely the likelihood of something "miraculous" happening within my realm of experience at instant A+1 is next to nil, since I'm (practically speaking) in a small, closed system with a limited number of physical objects whose properties (other than those of me myself) are highly static and predictable. -
654:
i suppose that is covered by saying 'the average person', as opposed to specifying hermits who never leave their rooms. i suppose he could specify it as only applying to people who experience things. however, even in your self-described isolation booth, there are still millions of possible miracles
638:
I'm no mathematician, but as explained it seems deeply flawed. To work that way, wouldn't each of the 1,000,000 "events" have to be completely independent, not causally linked to one another as actual experiences are? If I'm in my room at instant A, alone, with the door closed, unmiraculously reading
559:
There should be a critique on this page, the definition of miracle is flawed. Littlewood makes the assumption based on his own particular reasoning that a miracle is any event that has a one in million chance of occuring. I don't know how widespread this view is, but it seems to me that the generally
522:
So the upshot of this is that if you make three million predictive guesses at odds of a million-to-one, then it's probable (i.e., better than evens) that you'll be right on one of them. Am I missing some dramatic subtlety here? Isn't this a "law" akin to saying that "Nice Things Are Better Than Nasty
727:
The actual probability of a one in a million event happening in one million events is ~63.21% using(1-P)^n. So there's a greater than a third of a chance of the "miracle" event not occurring in the 35 days. There's also about 26.42% chance of at least two such events happening. Seems strange that a
601:
The person who survives the air crash/ship sinking/earthquake/tsunami/bombing/shooting/dangerous disease appears on TV saying, "It's a miracle! Praise the Flying
Spaghetti Monster!" The other 99 or 999 or 9999 people who got killed by the same cause don't get to express their opinions on the matter.
455:
The first sentence, however, makes perfect sense. Moreover, almost every submission on this page seems to assume that
Littlewood's law is a mathematical theorem, rather than a joke with a serious undertone. Although one might think that this should not be necessary, it appears that perhaps this
781:
The preamble to the article states that this "law" was "framed by... Littlewood in 1986." However, Littlewood died nine years earlier in 1977. Perhaps whoever wrote this meant that the "framing" or publication was posthumous. Whatever the intended meaning of the sentence is, I think some
416:
The submissions on this page seem to be largely non-constructive and commentary. Please keep discussion to the improvement of the article itself. Persons accessing this article through systems such as
StumbleUpon are requested to keep comments within the pages of their site.
480:
Littlewood's Law supposes these miracles to happen individually? Perhaps a more in depth explanation is due, seems like questionable math to me. I'd also be interested in hearing some examples of these so-called miracles if
Littlewood acknowledges their existence.
497:
This particular rendering of
Littlewoods law is seriously flawed. The only way to make it can make sense is to say: 'If a person makes 1 prediction (of an event with a 1 in a million probability) every second for 35 days, then they will probably be right once'
728:
mathematician publishing such an anecdote would be satisfied with an "on average" guess when calculating the actual probability would be child's play (I'm assuming
Cambridge had a calculator capable of executing exponents during Littlewood's tenure).
712:
Your criticism is correct, but it would count as original research to note that, for people whose lives change significantly more on the order of hours than seconds, they should only expect a miraculous event every five lifetimes or so.
153:
560:
accepted view of a miracle is completely unexplainable and arguably illogical event. obvious examples would include raising the dead, levitation, disease disapearing without any scientific explanation etc.
394:
147:
572:
Folks, this "Law" is obviously intended only as a rough approximation. It's also very obvious that people very commonly use the word "miracle" in a general sense.
695:
Er... it is not our place to criticise
Littlewood's concept of a miracle. If reliable sources exist that detail such a critique, then use those in the article.
845:
830:
384:
305:
295:
433:
The latter sentence above is complete non-sense. The source via which you access an article is completely irrelevant to the comments you may/should leave.
619:
A new section on "Criticism" is called for to discuss several flaws with this hypothesis. The definition is flawed, the probabilities are flawed, etc.
79:
44:
801:
above, it seems like the anecdote Dyson told had many basic inaccuracies, to the point where at least heavy revision is appropriate, if not a merge.
850:
840:
835:
825:
669:
The real dodgy probability is the definition - aside from 1:1000000 odds being kind of low for miracles, saying something has 1:1000000 odds
360:
271:
85:
714:
682:
656:
640:
434:
735:
541:
351:
328:
250:
227:
168:
135:
99:
30:
758:, Littlewood never said anything even close to "Littlewood's Law of Miracles", and definitely not in the claimed source (the
104:
20:
74:
700:
202:
770:
65:
129:
763:
270:
related articles on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
806:
125:
190:
718:
686:
438:
739:
696:
660:
644:
607:
109:
545:
787:
175:
755:
655:
that could occur. you just naturally reject their likelihood because they are, after all, miraculous. --
583:
208:
677:, you fail 999999 times out a 1000000. The law of really big numbers still makes his larger point, but
343:
322:
731:
461:
524:
802:
624:
161:
55:
359:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
603:
499:
484:
70:
141:
24:
783:
51:
673:
mean that it occurs every 1000000 otherwise independent events in a persons' life: it means
242:
221:
767:
457:
588:
620:
819:
263:
259:
561:
540:
Littlewood says we're only actively "experiencing" things for a third of each day.
766:. Since they are so similar in the first place, a merge might be warranted. --
356:
267:
810:
791:
743:
722:
704:
690:
664:
648:
628:
611:
564:
549:
527:
502:
487:
465:
442:
510:
I have a v v bad headcold at the moment, so I may have hallucinated this.
681:"law" and the monthly rate is just arguing from misleading definition. -
255:
584:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22it%27s+a+miracle%22+police+paramedic
762:). Freeman Dyson seems to have com up with it as a variant on the
184:
15:
518:
1: 1,000,000 < 3,000,000 by a factor of three, obviously;
798:
589:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22miraculous+escape%22
160:
355:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
254:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
514:60 (seconds) x 60 x 24 x 35 (days) ~= 3,000,000;
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
174:
8:
188:
777:Year in preamble. Littlewood died in 1977.
729:
317:
216:
754:I did some looking into the source and
749:
319:
218:
456:should be pointed out in the article.
7:
750:Littlewood's Law: Not By Littlewood?
349:This article is within the scope of
248:This article is within the scope of
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
846:Low-importance Statistics articles
831:Low-importance Skepticism articles
14:
369:Knowledge:WikiProject Statistics
342:
321:
280:Knowledge:WikiProject Skepticism
241:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
851:WikiProject Statistics articles
841:Start-Class Statistics articles
836:WikiProject Skepticism articles
826:Start-Class Skepticism articles
389:This article has been rated as
372:Template:WikiProject Statistics
300:This article has been rated as
283:Template:WikiProject Skepticism
811:08:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
792:11:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
427:04:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
1:
773:01:04 17 February 2019 (GMT)
675:when you try to accomplish it
612:23:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
528:11:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
503:20:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
488:06:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
363:and see a list of open tasks.
274:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
744:16:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
665:23:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
550:17:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
867:
764:Law of Truly Large Numbers
443:18:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
306:project's importance scale
782:clarification is needed.
723:21:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
649:20:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
565:19:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
388:
337:
299:
236:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
705:17:58, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
691:01:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
629:19:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
466:03:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
352:WikiProject Statistics
251:WikiProject Skepticism
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
634:Dodgy Probabilistics?
100:Neutral point of view
756:as far as I can tell
105:No original research
797:Along with Gwern's
423:Exemplar Sententia.
412:Talk Page guidlines
375:Statistics articles
286:Skepticism articles
697:Fences and windows
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
746:
734:comment added by
409:
408:
405:
404:
401:
400:
316:
315:
312:
311:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
858:
426:
425:
395:importance scale
377:
376:
373:
370:
367:
346:
339:
338:
333:
325:
318:
288:
287:
284:
281:
278:
245:
238:
237:
232:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
25:Littlewood's law
16:
866:
865:
861:
860:
859:
857:
856:
855:
816:
815:
779:
752:
636:
495:
478:
421:
420:
414:
374:
371:
368:
365:
364:
331:
285:
282:
279:
276:
275:
230:
201:on Knowledge's
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
864:
862:
854:
853:
848:
843:
838:
833:
828:
818:
817:
814:
813:
803:Piotr iskander
778:
775:
751:
748:
710:
709:
708:
707:
667:
635:
632:
617:
616:
615:
614:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
586:
576:
575:
574:
573:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
533:
532:
531:
530:
494:
491:
477:
474:
473:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
448:
447:
446:
445:
413:
410:
407:
406:
403:
402:
399:
398:
391:Low-importance
387:
381:
380:
378:
361:the discussion
347:
335:
334:
332:Low‑importance
326:
314:
313:
310:
309:
302:Low-importance
298:
292:
291:
289:
272:the discussion
246:
234:
233:
231:Low‑importance
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
863:
852:
849:
847:
844:
842:
839:
837:
834:
832:
829:
827:
824:
823:
821:
812:
808:
804:
800:
796:
795:
794:
793:
789:
785:
776:
774:
772:
769:
765:
761:
757:
747:
745:
741:
737:
733:
725:
724:
720:
716:
715:24.173.186.26
706:
702:
698:
694:
693:
692:
688:
684:
683:114.91.64.248
680:
676:
672:
668:
666:
662:
658:
657:65.31.193.126
653:
652:
651:
650:
646:
642:
641:65.213.77.129
633:
631:
630:
626:
622:
613:
609:
605:
604:Writtenonsand
600:
599:
598:
597:
590:
587:
585:
582:
581:
580:
579:
578:
577:
571:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
563:
551:
547:
543:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
529:
526:
521:
517:
513:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
501:
492:
490:
489:
486:
482:
475:
467:
463:
459:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
444:
440:
436:
435:130.225.20.24
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
424:
418:
411:
396:
392:
386:
383:
382:
379:
362:
358:
354:
353:
348:
345:
341:
340:
336:
330:
327:
324:
320:
307:
303:
297:
294:
293:
290:
273:
269:
265:
264:pseudohistory
261:
260:pseudoscience
257:
253:
252:
247:
244:
240:
239:
235:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
784:GibbNotGibbs
780:
759:
753:
736:68.60.65.170
730:— Preceding
726:
711:
678:
674:
670:
637:
618:
558:
519:
515:
511:
496:
483:
479:
422:
419:
415:
390:
350:
301:
249:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
542:78.32.91.33
476:Definition?
199:Start-class
148:free images
31:not a forum
820:Categories
771:(contribs)
760:Miscellany
458:AlexFekken
366:Statistics
357:statistics
329:Statistics
277:Skepticism
268:skepticism
228:Skepticism
621:Rlsheehan
525:Garrick92
523:Things"?
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
732:unsigned
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
799:comment
671:doesn't
562:Colin 8
393:on the
304:on the
256:science
154:WP refs
142:scholar
500:Deglog
493:Piffle
485:Caarth
205:scale.
126:Google
768:Gwern
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
807:talk
788:talk
740:talk
719:talk
701:talk
687:talk
679:this
661:talk
645:talk
625:talk
608:talk
546:talk
462:talk
439:talk
266:and
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
602:--
385:Low
296:Low
176:TWL
822::
809:)
790:)
742:)
721:)
703:)
689:)
663:)
647:)
627:)
610:)
548:)
520:3)
516:2)
512:1)
464:)
441:)
262:,
258:,
156:)
54:;
805:(
786:(
738:(
717:(
699:(
685:(
659:(
643:(
623:(
606:(
544:(
460:(
437:(
397:.
308:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
