christopherj comments on Yes, Virginia, You Can Be 99.99% (Or More!) Certain That 53 Is Prime - Less Wrong

38 Post author: ChrisHallquist 07 November 2013 07:45AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (68)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: philh 07 November 2013 02:30:15PM 7 points [-]

Christian apologist William Lane Craig claims the skeptical slogan "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is contradicted by probability theory, because it actually wouldn't take all that much evidence to convince us that, for example, "the numbers chosen in last night's lottery were 4, 2, 9, 7, 8 and 3." The correct response to this argument is to say that the prior probability of a miracle occurring is orders of magnitude smaller than mere one in a million odds.

I'm not sure that response works. Flip a fair coin two hundred times, tell me the results, then show me the video and I'll almost certainly believe you. But if the results were H^200, I won't; I'll assume you were wrong or lying about the coin being fair, or something.

H^200 isn't any less likely than any other sequence of two hundred coin flips, but it's still one of the most extraordinary. Extraordinariness just doesn't feel like it's a mere question of prior probability.

Comment author: christopherj 31 December 2013 07:51:07PM *  0 points [-]

Getting 200 heads only in coinflipping is just as likely as any other result. However, it is of incredibly low entropy -- you should not expect to see a pattern of that sort (less bits to describe than listing the results). It's also impossibly unlikely as a result from a fair coin, compared to as a result of fraud or an unfair coin.