Out of Pod Experience

Exactly.

To state that it is impossible to achieve any number of consecutive heads is to state that at some point, the odds of the coin flip become something other than 50/50.

He doesn't understand that, and refuses all attempts to demonstrate it.

Actually, you did.
Just a couple of posts earlier.
Here's the quote:



As long as the chance to flip one more head is not 0%, it's still possible to flip it.
In order to make it IMPOSSIBLE to flip another head, the chance of flipping it should be 0%.
You claim that after a certain number of heads (which you refuse to specify) the universe MUST eventually reduce the chance of the next head to exactly 0%.

If you DON'T claim that, then you accept the possibility of flipping one extra head no matter how many heads you flipped before.
And if you do it enough times, you can flip any number of heads you are looking for.
Which you say is impossible. Not unlikely, impossible. As in, actually 0% chance, not very small. Which can only happen if the chance of at least one toss is exactly 0%. Which you seem to think you didn't claim.

Yea but that does not mean it drops to 0 by any means. You don't seem to understand the idea of a multitude of forces acting upon the coin and how the very shape of the coin acts like a machine designed to convert them to a 50:50 output. You have to try and NOT think like a calculator and more like a human being.

It does.
As long as something is not exactly 0% possible, it's still possible, so with enough time, it can happen.
You say it CAN'T happen, so in order for that to be true, at least one toss needs to have exactly 0% chance.

You don't seem to understand that what you're saying is completely unscientific and unfounded.



That sounds an awful lot like "don't confuse me with the facts". When discussing probability, calculators are necessary and emotions are useless.

Because you refuse to address it, I'll just quote myself:

If 20 consecutive heads is possible, then 1,000,000 is possible. UNLESS you can demonstrate a point at which it becomes impossible to flip heads again. So it's on you to PROVE where that event occurs.

Give us the magic impossible number, or give up.

For something to be IMPOSSIBLE (as opposed to unlikely), at least one of the events in the string NEEDS to be impossible (as opposed to unlikely).

You claim throwing N "heads" in a row is IMPOSSIBLE (as opposed to unlikely) when N is arbitrarily large. I don't really care how large that N is supposed to be, as long as you accept that N-1 heads in a row are possible.

In order for that to happen, for the Nth coin toss it should be IMPOSSIBLE to get "heads".

Why should it ever be IMPOSSIBLE to throw a heads on any given REASONABLY fair coin ?

You may fail at programing is all. As stated the total output does not have to be recorded.

I have sufficient evidence to assume that a billion heads WILL happen if I had the time to attempt it. This goes back to my question of N+1: If I can get two heads, why can't I get three? Why not four? Why not 20? 21? 22? 50? 100? 101? 1,000,000? I find no reason to expect a change in the pattern...once again, UNLESS it will at some point become impossible to flip heads. I've seen zero evidence of such an event therefore all combinations are possible, including a billion billion consecutive heads.



The coin flip is the most basic expression of randomness we have. Nothing is simpler than a 50/50 result. There are a thousand billion billion billion possible combinations of 100 coin tosses. Only TWO of those will yield the result you're talking about. Now do you understand why you've never seen any such thing? When random factors align to produce results that rare, we call it a miracle. If you lined up every coin toss in the history of humanity, the odds of having a run of 100 are still infinitesimal. And most random events are far more complex than that.

But we're not talking about human history. Or even the history or size of the universe. We're talking about infinity. That's what you don't seem to get: no matter how small the odds of a particular pattern appearing at random, those odds increase with time.

You're unable to even name the point at which it becomes impossible to land one more head, but you insist it exists. You can't cite any rational explanation for the impossibility, but you doggedly hold on to the conviction that it's impossible. Every argument you present is emotional and laden with logic fallacies. In short, you've got nothing to support your argument except "I just know it". Logic and math conflict with your position.

It really comes down to the trivial issue of something only being actually impossible if at least one event in the string is actually impossible, so it means he's saying a particular coin toss (after X heads, where X is some magic maximum possible number) will always turn up tails instead of heads.
He refuses to say what that magical value of X is, and why that coin has a 0% chance of turning heads on toss X+1.

Or, alternatively, if you prefer, he's claiming that something can be possible AND literally impossible (as opposed to figuratively impossible, as in highly unlikely) at the same time.

Hilarious.