You are correct, you must have done stats some time.
_________________Robert Wurtz II
However it is a simple question as I see it. We know that 300,000 is on the high end in terms of hair count. that would be a dense populated large head.
_________________Ron Bailey
Ah, the question was already answered before I had the chance to post.Our Stats teacher once asked if 10,000 homes received for six consecutive weeks in a row, market predictions from a trading house - and if those predictions turned out to be absolutely correct each and every week, would be willing to trust them with an investment? Some said yes, some said no, and the teacher showed then if in week one the firm distributed 640,000 pamphlets, half predicting movement one way, and half the other, then the next week they did the same with the 320,000 that were correctly predicted, and again with the 160,000, then 80,000, then 40,000, then 20,000 and finally the last 10,000 get six aces in a row. From that ten thousand perhaps only 5% (500 people) would invest - but that would more than pay for their pamphlet expenses...I gave a statistical answer to the original question, but having just seen robert's answer, I edited it out. It was only posted for a minute or so anyway.Dan/\/\/\
_________________Daniel van de Laar
Well, this is not an answer to your question, but something else to consider.It says that the very hairs of our head are numbered.So, to me, this means that I could go find a hair on the floor or the couch and God could tell me: "Yes, that's number 10,461."He's a great God!
_________________Mark
RobertW wrote:It relates to my walk with God in that at times I see things happening that I know are impossible without God intervening. Helps me see God at work in my life and the life of others when I can quickly estimate how likely some event was to take place.
_________________Zeke Oosthuis
Did you know that if there are 23 people in a room that there is a greater than 50% chance that at least 2 of them will have the same birthday?This flies in the face of our intuition (mine anyway) but it is statisticaly accurate.
Interesting. I suppose its like taking something to its furtherest degree and working back till we have a logical framework by which to measure things by