Ask a physicist anything. (5)

pgp_protector · Mar 1, 2011

Well for a 2 X 5 vs 1 X 10 the % break down

Value 2X5 1X10
1 0.00% 10.00%
2 4.00% 10.00%
3 8.00% 10.00%
4 12.00% 10.00%
5 16.00% 10.00%
6 20.00% 10.00%
7 16.00% 10.00%
8 12.00% 10.00%
9 8.00% 10.00%
10 4.00% 10.00%

Blayz · Mar 1, 2011

pgp_protector said:
Well for a 2 X 5 vs 1 X 10 the % break down

Value 2X5 1X10
1 0.00% 10.00%
2 4.00% 10.00%
3 8.00% 10.00%
4 12.00% 10.00%
5 16.00% 10.00%
6 20.00% 10.00%
7 16.00% 10.00%
8 12.00% 10.00%
9 8.00% 10.00%
10 4.00% 10.00%

So the chance of the 2d5 winning is
2d5 rolls 2 (0.04) x 1d10 rolls less than 2 (0.1) = 0.004
+ 2d5 rolls 3 (0.08) x 1d10 rolls less than 3 (0.2) = 0.016
+ 2d5 rolls 4 (0.12) x 1d10 rolls less than 4 (0.3) = 0.036
+ 2d5 rolls 5 (0.16) x 1d10 rolls less than 5 (0.4) = 0.072
+ 2d5 rolls 6 (0.2) x 1d10 rolls less than 6 (0.5) = 0.1
0.16 x 0.6 = 0.096
0.12 x 0.7 = 0.084
0.08 x 0.8 = 0.064
0.04 x 0.9 = 0.036

Combined chance is 0.508, or 50.8%

You can do the same for the first example, it's just alot more numbers.

1611AV · Mar 2, 2011

Can something be cut in half so many times that it becomes nothing? Or does it just continue to get smaller?

Wiccan_Child · Mar 2, 2011

1611AV said:
Can something be cut in half so many times that it becomes nothing? Or does it just continue to get smaller?

You'd eventually get to its foundational building blocks. A plastic block is just a collection of a type of molecule, and cutting it in half would eventually give you one of those molecules. You could split that in half, eventually giving a single atom, and then a single subatomic particle (a proton, say), and then an individual quark or gluon.

As far as we know, quarks, gluons, and other particles that make up the Standard Model are point-particles that aren't made up of anything else.

Unless, of course, they are

Chesterton · Mar 2, 2011

1611AV · Mar 2, 2011

Wiccan_Child said:
You'd eventually get to its foundational building blocks. A plastic block is just a collection of a type of molecule, and cutting it in half would eventually give you one of those molecules. You could split that in half, eventually giving a single atom, and then a single subatomic particle (a proton, say), and then an individual quark or gluon.

As far as we know, quarks, gluons, and other particles that make up the Standard Model are point-particles that aren't made up of anything else.

Unless, of course, they are

I Always thought that it was interesting . It seems impossible cut something in half until you have nothing because what then can you rebuild it with? It seems it would just keep going on for ever. Just a thought.

Sorry I cant include all the Zy=2(0.8_)X stuff

Wiccan_Child · Mar 2, 2011

1611AV said:
I Always thought that it was interesting . It seems impossible cut something in half until you have nothing because what then can you rebuild it with? It seems it would just keep going on for ever. Just a thought.

It's the same idea that lead an ancient Greek philosopher (I can't remember his name) to posit the existence of the atmos, the indivisible unit that everything is made of. Millennia later, we found such an indivisible unit, and gave it the same name: the atom.

'Course, turns out it was divisible. But still.

1611AV said:
Sorry I cant include all the Zy=2(0.8_)X stuff

The who what stuff??

Tinker Grey · Mar 2, 2011

Wiccan_Child said:
It's the same idea that lead an ancient Greek philosopher (I can't remember his name) to posit the existence of the atmos, the indivisible unit that everything is made of.

Democritus, 5th Century BC.

1611AV · Mar 2, 2011

A star is say 1,000,000,000 light years away. Do we see the light that is 1,000,000,000 light years old?

If the above is true then, have there been any new lights popping up in our sky that say are 1,000,000,010 light years away?

I always see the same pattern of stars. Why?

Drathnor · Mar 2, 2011

Do quark nutrinos favor being matter over antimatter?

(Somthing i went to a lecture on )

Exiledoomsayer · Mar 2, 2011

Wiccan_Child said:
Bear with me while I do the sums...

Not to rush you or anything but if working the sums out is giving that much issues I would settle for the formula that would need to be used to arrive at the answer.

TerranceL · Mar 2, 2011

1611AV said:
A star is say 1,000,000,000 light years away. Do we see the light that is 1,000,000,000 light years old?

Yes.

If the above is true then, have there been any new lights popping up in our sky that say are 1,000,000,010 light years away?

I don't see why not.

I always see the same pattern of stars. Why?

Er, why wouldn't you? Stars move very slowly, I once saw a drawn example of what the constellation orion looked like to the greeks, if you compare it to the constellation today it's obvious that some of the stars have moved.

Blayz · Mar 2, 2011

Exiledoomsayer said:
Not to rush you or anything but if working the sums out is giving that much issues I would settle for the formula that would need to be used to arrive at the answer.

There is no formula, you have to run a dynamic programming algorithm to build a look-up table that is different for each dice combination. I wrote one once, but have no idea where it got to.

Exiledoomsayer · Mar 2, 2011

Blayz said:
There is no formula, you have to run a dynamic programming algorithm to build a look-up table that is different for each dice combination. I wrote one once, but have no idea where it got to.

I see.
Thanks for the info.
Hm I suppose its even more complicated then I thought.

mzungu · Mar 3, 2011

1611AV said:
Can something be cut in half so many times that it becomes nothing? Or does it just continue to get smaller?

Everything is made up of energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Energy transforms to matter and matter transforms back to energy. Thus one can conclude that eventually one will be left with nothing more than pure energy.

It is extremely difficult to visualise anything that is not bound by 3 spatial dimensions as we are literally enslaved in our 3 spatial dimensions. At the quantum level this is not so. Please watch the video as it may help you understand how limited our perceptions are and how science can and has been able to widen our field of view through mathematical and experimental deductions.

Quantum Physics Double Slit Experiment - What The Bleep Movie

AV1611VET · Mar 3, 2011

As I understand it, you eventually reach what is called the Planck length -- (1.6162 × 10[sup]-35[/sup] m) -- where you can no longer halve something.

Naraoia · Mar 3, 2011

Exiledoomsayer said:
I see.
Thanks for the info.
Hm I suppose its even more complicated then I thought.

It's not so much "complicated" as "long and tedious without computer muscle"

mzungu · Mar 3, 2011

AV1611VET said:
As I understand it, you eventually reach what is called the Planck length -- (1.6162 × 10[sup]-35[/sup] m) -- where you can no longer halve something.

Please watch the video again and you will see that at some point at the quantum level; divisions have no meaning! As for the Planck level? Well let's put it this way: CHAOS REIGNS!

TerranceL · Mar 3, 2011

What's the coolest thing you've ever seen in physics?

AV1611VET · Mar 3, 2011

TerranceL said:
What's the coolest thing you've ever seen in physics?

Ask a physicist anything. (5)

Noted strange person

Well-Known Member

REPENT YE, AND BELIEVE THE GOSPEL.

Contributor

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

REPENT YE, AND BELIEVE THE GOSPEL.

Contributor

Wanderer

REPENT YE, AND BELIEVE THE GOSPEL.

University physics student

Only toke me 1 year to work out how to change this

Sarcasm is kind of an art isn't it?

Well-Known Member

Only toke me 1 year to work out how to change this

INVICTUS

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Apprentice Biologist

INVICTUS

Sarcasm is kind of an art isn't it?

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency