You are reading a single comment by @frankenbike and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
Yes, an extremely clear statement of the problem.
It occurs to me now that the question is a bit nonsensical; ironically Leibniz wouldn't have been aware of confidence intervals, certainty, etc., so wouldn't actually have been able prove anything empirically anyway! But it's still an interesting question.
frankenbike
You are correct, but Leibniz, despite being a mathematical genius, got it wrong and assumed 6,5 was the same outcome as 5,6 and therefore equally likely to get as 6,6.
In his defence probability was a new field at the time, and we only understand it better with the benefit of centuries of history on our side.
The question asks
But it doesn't say what degree of certainty you'd need to have in order to say that.
Consider the question
This is a similar kind of question where you compare your hypothesis with the observations.
So you'd need some way of comparing your observed results against the expected results for that many throws.
If, after n throws, our outcome is x instances of 11 and y instances of 12, does that fall within the realms of chance, or do we need to revise our model?
edit: This is a slow response to a comment far upthread...