48 ms·
>So, what’s the point? Why bother with nearly three months of effort to collect this data? One easy answer is that I simply found it interesting. But I think a
by fouc 8y ago
>So, what’s the point? Why bother with nearly three months of effort to collect this data? One easy answer is that I simply found it interesting. But I think a better answer is that this seemed like a great opportunity to demonstrate the predictive power of mathematics. A few months ago, we did some calculations on a cocktail napkin, so to speak, predicting that we should be able to find a pair of identical packs of Skittles with a reasonably– and perhaps surprisingly– small amount of effort. Actually seeing that effort through to the finish line can be a vivid demonstration for students of this predictive power of what might otherwise be viewed as “merely abstract” and not concretely useful mathematics.
- Johnny555 8y agoI'd think that he could have also proven this with a lot less work by writing a simulation.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- spydum 8y agoSimulation proves only the theory - sampling and experimentation proves the implementation. Otherwise it might be entirely possible for the packaging process to fill an exact match at a far higher rate - and for the mix to NOT be random.
- Johnny555 8y agoRight, so he didn't really prove the implementation, he'd need to repeat his experiment a number of times. Trivial in a simulation, less so if you have to buy and count them.
- whatshisface 8y agoIt would not have been practical to design a simulation of a Skittles packaging machine, as the design of those machines is not public information.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoHow would he know what distribution to use for the simulation without a sufficiently large dataset to use as an example? A simulation of a made-up system is pretty worthless.
- billfruit 8y agoBut the experiment also does not prove much beyond that it was 488 in this particular one case or does it?
- jjeaff 8y agoBut a simulation would not be able to prove your assumptions correct and would do nothing but validate your math. All your math can be correct but if your assumptions are incorrect, your results may not be accurate.
- Johnny555 8y agoThe simulation needn't use the same math. It does, however, help validate the assumptions -- that bags are filled randomly. But to write his simulation, he just needs to fill virtual bags with random colors and count them, no math needed.
- sopooneo 8y agoBut "fill bags with random colors" is already basing your simulation on the assumption that the colors are uniformly distributed. And in fact, that seems to be one of the things he found incorrect in his actual experiment.
- robertAngst 8y ago>Actually seeing that effort through to the finish line can be a vivid demonstration for students of this predictive power of what might otherwise be viewed as “merely abstract” and not concretely useful mathematics. This is how I feel about engineering. If you design something, prove it out with logic and math. It will work. Or you will learn where you were wrong.
- jjeaff 8y ago>If you design something, prove it out with logic and math. It will work. >Or you will learn where you were wrong. In other words, if you design something and prove it out with logic and math, sometimes it will work and sometimes it won't...
- gonzo41 8y agoMore that your model was wrong and your math needs to get better.
- robertAngst 8y agoYes. And for 'discovered' things, there is no reason to make a mistake. However, most of the time you are working on something that is New.
- lsc 8y ago>However, most of the time you are working on something that is New. So I was just thinking about that today. I just bought one of those ridiculous 'incline' rowing machines; as you 'row' it lifts your body off the ground to provide resistance (in addition to the normal rowing motions) - I'd bet money this design lasts rather longer than the type of cheap rowing machine that uses gas pistons to provide the resistance. There's all sorts of ordinary, everyday stuff that must be engineered to not come apart while using the absolute minimum of material (or the absolute cheapest and lightest of material; I imagine shipping was a significant portion of the cost to me) I mean, that's the thing about engineering stuff. If you are willing to spend money on lots of high quality raw materials, even someone like me without much engineering background at all can design something that lasts just by massively over-speccing everything. The engineering skill comes in when you have to build a rowing machine that can stand up to vigorous use by a fifteen stone american, but they only give you a buck fifty worth of aluminum to work with. I mean, I guess what I'm saying is that I look around my world and I see a bunch of stuff that must have taken a huge amount of engineering skill to make (I mean, to make at the price point that I got it at... to be functional in spite of the absolute minimum of raw materials) - would all that stuff be 'new' to an engineer?
- waffleguy 8y agoYo mama raised a fool?
- indigodaddy 8y agoCan I ask the point of quoting a snippet of the article without comment?
- mattmar96 8y agoProvides us (hn users) a place to discuss that thought.
- ademup 8y agoI admit; I don't read most articles. I prefer the HNer snippets like this. I generally find HN comments to be more cogent and provocative than most editorial nonsense. So, thank you parent, for choosing and posting a snippet which you considered worthy.
- chasontherobot 8y agoYes, it's pretty obvious that lots of HN readers don't actually read the article.
- craftyguy 8y agoAt this point, it should be an official HN rule: "do not read the article, go directly to the comments and speculate what the article is about based on the character-limited title"
- samstave 8y agoWell, TBF, thats the generally normal forum behaviour when you 'know your audience' For example, know that most HNers are fairly informed individuals in tech. Thus, I trust that I am going to find a good deal of content and insightful comments without reading the article - because I can typically glean the gist of the article and the tidbits that would have interested me anyway, from the HN community.
- craftyguy 8y ago
- muzani 8y agoThis is a big part why I like to play games of chance like poker and football simulators. It's a way of testing out your math-predictive skills.
- jv22222 8y agoIt's really hard for the human brain to comprehend what these type of long odds mean practically speaking. This is a great project that illustrates it rather well.
- koliber 8y agoWhy climb Everest? Because it was there! Pursue your passions, whether it is climbing a huge mountain or finding identical packs of skittles. It is what makes the world great and interesting.
- tobiasSoftware 8y agoThis sounds like a version of the birthday paradox. The chance that two Skittles packs are identical is very small, and the chance that a Skittles pack is identical to at least one pack in a large group is still small. However, the chance that an identical pair exists in a large group is not small.