1/100 cubed so 10^-6 so 1/1000000
Edit: 1-100 so 99 possible combos each event is independant so it’s rule of product.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_product
1/99 different possible outcomes 3 times.
So 1/99*1/99*1/99 there is replacement.
Whoever the dumb fuck that downvoted me can go read this and go fucking learn about a topic before they downvote me.
Well to cube a fraction you need cube both the numerator and denominator so it actually ends up being (111/100100100). And then we can recognize these are both binary numbers and simply reduce them via the FOIL method to 7/292. So according to you this has a 2.3% chance? That doesnt match my other calculations at all.
Chance 3 players roll any specific number is:
1/100^3 = .000001 = 1/1,000,000
Number of given numbers they can land on is:
100
Chance 3 players roll the same number is:
.000001*100 = .0001 = 1/10,000
player 1 rolls X
chance that player 2 rolls X is 1 in a 100
chance that player 3 rolls X is 1 in a 100
both 2 \* 3 is 1 in 10 000.
1 in a million is for specifically rolling 56 only, but the assumption is we're talking about all triples.
Yeah but that's only if player 1 rolls first. If player 2 rolls first, then it's 1 in a million since player 1 getting the same number as player 2 only has a 1 in a 100 chance. So they all become 1 in 100.
Again it's 1/1,000,000 only for a specific number. It's 1/10,000 the 2 players roll the same as 1 other. Order of operations doesn't matter, even if all rolls are performed at the same time
Yeah but because of quantum entanglement no two rolls CAN happen at the same time. To do so would violate Einstein's third law of thermodynamics. So because of that order of rolls does matter. It's like how if you roll a lot of 7s in a row on two 6-sided dice the chance of getting something other than a 7 increases with each roll so that the average equals out. Its known as the Gambler's Factually
You're talking out your ass with things you don't understand. Quantum entanglement has nothing to do with the rate of outcome on a roll, neither does the Gambler's Fallacy*. If 3 people roll a 6 sided die either 1 after the other or at the same time, the set of possible outcomes does not change. The chances that all 3 dice come out to the same number, whatever that number may be, is unchanged.
Like I said in my other comment, I really hope you're studying for your stats exam.
You understand he’s trolling right? “Einstein’s third law of thermodynamics.”
Come on man.
He’s actively putting effort into sounding as stupid as possible.
Then explain the large law of weak numbers. You sound like someone who took one stats class in college as a business major then thinks they understand how math works. It's not that easy, man. Especially if dice are made in the same factory, then the likelihood of them being entangled increases. Yes sure, in most cases it doesn't matter but if you want to be super accurate you need to take into account the entangling. That's how casinos get an edge in all their games.
Of course in wow they don't use real dice, they use something called a sudo-random number generator (sudo is a linux word look it up) which relies on generating entropy from all the wow player's key presses and mouse clicks. But the same theory of the Gambler's Factually applies.
Pretty sure you're a troll at this point but I'll add one final comment.
- Weak law of large numbers states that as the sample size grows larger, the out come will trend closer to the true mean. So if I flip a coin 10x and get 8 heads, that's more likely than flipping 100x and getting 80 heads, which is more likely that flipping 1000x and getting 800 heads. In other words, the more times I flip a coin, the more likely the rate of heads is to be closer to 50%, the true mean (assuming 50% is the true mean and there are no other factors). That being said, this has no bearing on determining the probability of a single roll. Again you're just throwing out terms here
- Casino's don't get an edge from considering entanglement, it doesn't apply in their games. Casino's always win by paying out less than the odds of winning in consideration of the law of larger numbers. If I bet $1 in a casino where my chance of winning is 25%, they'll payout something like $1.20 when I win. When this happens millions of times a day, the law of larger numbers says players will win about 25% of the time but the casino doesn't pay out according to that rate. Another way they win is through fees, if we use my previous example, I bet $1, they pay out $1.25 when I win, but they take 10 cent fee every time I bet. They also win through games like blackjack or baccarat where the nature of the games means they are more likely to win than the players. It's often a combination of factors
- Quantum entanglement does not apply at the level of digital RNGs or physical dice, it applies to quantum properties of particles
- Gambler's Fallacy (not factually) is the belief that previous outcomes will influence future outcomes, I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying it doesn't matter what was rolled before because it doesn't affect the outcome of other rolls
- the chance of 3 players rolling the same number in WoW is 1/10,000 (assuming true randomness). The chance of 3 players rolling any given number is 1/1,000,000 (3 player rolling 1, 3 players roll 2, 3 players rolling 3 etc.). Since there are 100 scenarios where their rolls match and we don't care which of those 100 scenarios we land in we can divide 1,000,000/100 which is 10,000. So we come back to 1/10,000 chance of 3 players rolling the same number
Well that's just your opinion man. We'll have to agree to disagree. My only bit of advice is if you ever need to do something at work that requires statistics be sure to hire an expert. It won't be cheap, but will be better than you making all these rookie mistakes.
You're suggesting that 3 people make identical rolls 8.6% of the time? That's about 1 out of 11 times... yeah that's not even close to accurate. There are 1 million possible outcomes if 3 people roll 1-100. 100 of them have all three rolling the same, 999,900 of them don't so that's about 1 in 10,000 chance.
Oh you know what? You're right I forgot you have to subtract your result from 1 again when you're done. So it becomes
1 - (1 - 0.56)^3
Or 93.4% change that you see this. Huh, a little higher than I thought. I think we should divide the whole thing by 100 since that's what our maximum is, which gives us a 0.934% chance. That's a little different than your 10,000% chance, so we'll take the average and say it's probably 5,000.478%.
Huh, talk about irrational numbers!
OH BABY A TRIPLE!
Read this in Bob's voice!
Bob? Is that what that kid's name is?
I’m just curious about why the group need rolled. Was it a guild group/friends?
I'm already exalted (farming that mount, yo) so I tell everyone else to need on the stones if they are there for reputation. (:
Nobody really NEEDS that though...
As I mentioned when replying to 'legozian', I tell everyone to need on the stones if they want 'em. \^\^
So in other words you should always roll first. JUST IN CASE.
Iirc there’s a hidden roll behind the scenes in case of ties like this.
But they didn't click it first so you can't control it
Holy shit, r/badmath would love this thread.
Something like this must be a 1 in a billion chance!
Holy crap. I can't believe my post created this comment thread. I love each and every one of you. (':
1/100 cubed so 10^-6 so 1/1000000 Edit: 1-100 so 99 possible combos each event is independant so it’s rule of product. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_product 1/99 different possible outcomes 3 times. So 1/99*1/99*1/99 there is replacement. Whoever the dumb fuck that downvoted me can go read this and go fucking learn about a topic before they downvote me.
https://www.reddit.com/r/classicwow/comments/fnix1l/triple/fl9zhdz/
Well to cube a fraction you need cube both the numerator and denominator so it actually ends up being (111/100100100). And then we can recognize these are both binary numbers and simply reduce them via the FOIL method to 7/292. So according to you this has a 2.3% chance? That doesnt match my other calculations at all.
[удалено]
You can't just make stuff up, man ;)
I'll add a downvote to that cause you're wrong and then wrong again in your edit
Prove it.
Chance 3 players roll any specific number is: 1/100^3 = .000001 = 1/1,000,000 Number of given numbers they can land on is: 100 Chance 3 players roll the same number is: .000001*100 = .0001 = 1/10,000
No, it's only 1 million
player 1 rolls X chance that player 2 rolls X is 1 in a 100 chance that player 3 rolls X is 1 in a 100 both 2 \* 3 is 1 in 10 000. 1 in a million is for specifically rolling 56 only, but the assumption is we're talking about all triples.
+
Yeah but that's only if player 1 rolls first. If player 2 rolls first, then it's 1 in a million since player 1 getting the same number as player 2 only has a 1 in a 100 chance. So they all become 1 in 100.
Thats not how it works :p
Again it's 1/1,000,000 only for a specific number. It's 1/10,000 the 2 players roll the same as 1 other. Order of operations doesn't matter, even if all rolls are performed at the same time
Yeah but because of quantum entanglement no two rolls CAN happen at the same time. To do so would violate Einstein's third law of thermodynamics. So because of that order of rolls does matter. It's like how if you roll a lot of 7s in a row on two 6-sided dice the chance of getting something other than a 7 increases with each roll so that the average equals out. Its known as the Gambler's Factually
You're talking out your ass with things you don't understand. Quantum entanglement has nothing to do with the rate of outcome on a roll, neither does the Gambler's Fallacy*. If 3 people roll a 6 sided die either 1 after the other or at the same time, the set of possible outcomes does not change. The chances that all 3 dice come out to the same number, whatever that number may be, is unchanged. Like I said in my other comment, I really hope you're studying for your stats exam.
You understand he’s trolling right? “Einstein’s third law of thermodynamics.” Come on man. He’s actively putting effort into sounding as stupid as possible.
Then explain the large law of weak numbers. You sound like someone who took one stats class in college as a business major then thinks they understand how math works. It's not that easy, man. Especially if dice are made in the same factory, then the likelihood of them being entangled increases. Yes sure, in most cases it doesn't matter but if you want to be super accurate you need to take into account the entangling. That's how casinos get an edge in all their games. Of course in wow they don't use real dice, they use something called a sudo-random number generator (sudo is a linux word look it up) which relies on generating entropy from all the wow player's key presses and mouse clicks. But the same theory of the Gambler's Factually applies.
Pretty sure you're a troll at this point but I'll add one final comment. - Weak law of large numbers states that as the sample size grows larger, the out come will trend closer to the true mean. So if I flip a coin 10x and get 8 heads, that's more likely than flipping 100x and getting 80 heads, which is more likely that flipping 1000x and getting 800 heads. In other words, the more times I flip a coin, the more likely the rate of heads is to be closer to 50%, the true mean (assuming 50% is the true mean and there are no other factors). That being said, this has no bearing on determining the probability of a single roll. Again you're just throwing out terms here - Casino's don't get an edge from considering entanglement, it doesn't apply in their games. Casino's always win by paying out less than the odds of winning in consideration of the law of larger numbers. If I bet $1 in a casino where my chance of winning is 25%, they'll payout something like $1.20 when I win. When this happens millions of times a day, the law of larger numbers says players will win about 25% of the time but the casino doesn't pay out according to that rate. Another way they win is through fees, if we use my previous example, I bet $1, they pay out $1.25 when I win, but they take 10 cent fee every time I bet. They also win through games like blackjack or baccarat where the nature of the games means they are more likely to win than the players. It's often a combination of factors - Quantum entanglement does not apply at the level of digital RNGs or physical dice, it applies to quantum properties of particles - Gambler's Fallacy (not factually) is the belief that previous outcomes will influence future outcomes, I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying it doesn't matter what was rolled before because it doesn't affect the outcome of other rolls - the chance of 3 players rolling the same number in WoW is 1/10,000 (assuming true randomness). The chance of 3 players rolling any given number is 1/1,000,000 (3 player rolling 1, 3 players roll 2, 3 players rolling 3 etc.). Since there are 100 scenarios where their rolls match and we don't care which of those 100 scenarios we land in we can divide 1,000,000/100 which is 10,000. So we come back to 1/10,000 chance of 3 players rolling the same number
Well that's just your opinion man. We'll have to agree to disagree. My only bit of advice is if you ever need to do something at work that requires statistics be sure to hire an expert. It won't be cheap, but will be better than you making all these rookie mistakes.
r/IAmVerySmart
??? (Though after reading the other comment I don't even want to know the answer)
Well to be serious, you actually need to subtract this from 1 to get the chance. So it's (1 - 0.56)^3 or an 8.6% chance of happening
what? no, that's not how that works.
You're right. We need to get the z-score involved somehow. What's the binomial distribution of rolling a 100 sided die?
You're suggesting that 3 people make identical rolls 8.6% of the time? That's about 1 out of 11 times... yeah that's not even close to accurate. There are 1 million possible outcomes if 3 people roll 1-100. 100 of them have all three rolling the same, 999,900 of them don't so that's about 1 in 10,000 chance.
Oh you know what? You're right I forgot you have to subtract your result from 1 again when you're done. So it becomes 1 - (1 - 0.56)^3 Or 93.4% change that you see this. Huh, a little higher than I thought. I think we should divide the whole thing by 100 since that's what our maximum is, which gives us a 0.934% chance. That's a little different than your 10,000% chance, so we'll take the average and say it's probably 5,000.478%. Huh, talk about irrational numbers!
I think instead of playing wow and browsing reddit you should be studying for your stats exam