A Test for Sandsted

[aarthrj3811]

We know the odds are 1 in 100 to get the date right in my first example. It's not a guess, and it is based on "real facts."

And where can one find these "real facts"?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[ClonedSIM]

We know the odds are 1 in 100 to get the date right in my first example. It's not a guess, and it is based on "real facts."

And where can one find these "real facts"?

Oy vey, Art. It's math, buddy, not dowsing..... Okay, one more time. This is using my example, not the actual test.

You have 10 coins in front of you, each with a different date, from 1990 to 2000. You have to pick one from this 10. This choice gives the odds of 1 in 10. One coin from the row of 10. 1 in 10. Agreed?

Okay, with your one coin, you have to assign a date to it. You have 10 possible dates, from 1990 to 2000. This is, again, 1 in 10. Understand?

Now, you have a 1 in 10 choice of coins and a 1 in 10 choice of dates, but this has to be done with only one coin. It's probability at play here, with 10 choices and 10 more choices, you have 100 possible combinations without knowing any other information about the coins. But you only get one guess. So your guess is 1 out of 100 possibilities. 1-to-100 odds. Real facts. Real math.

Oh, and to answer your question even more directly, try a 9th grade math textbook.

 

[Mike(Mont)]

Art is right, the odds aren't one in a hundred. I think it would be a difficult problem to solve since you don't know how many coins are out there for each year. But if you could somehow find out, each year has a different probability of it's fraction to the whole. And to add to that, a given collector may tend towards certain dates, maybe the rare ones and maybe not. A metal detector for instance would have certain dates that were common at the place of location, and that depends on how many other metal detectors were there first and how good they were. Darned near impossible to figure. Now if there was a full collection of coins for each/every year, then the odds would be equal for each coin except that some years had different mints.

 

[Carl-NC]

We are given statistics based on math formulas all the time. How many are right when real statistics are totaled up? All we have been given is the odds of what someones math formula says they should be. In other words ...It is a guess.

Actually, true guessing in real-world situations follows mathematical distributions precisely. If it did not, then the whole field of statistics would be bogus.

Hey af1733....As a long time poker player I know how important the odds are. I also know that odds are just part of the game. The odds of poker are a real stastistic that has been proven over and over.

Gambling (but not necessarily poker*) is an excellent example of statistics at work. Vegas casinos design their games in such a way that the mathematical odds work out about 55% in their favor in the long run. That way, gamers get the illusion of winning (with an occasional Real Winner) while the house is always the winner at the end of the day. Do you believe that the actual statistical distributions of gaming results does NOT follow what the casinos calculated when they designed the games?

How 'bout lotteries? Do you believe that actual lottery results are defying the distributions that were calculated when the lotteries were designed?

What, exactly, would you base your theory that real-world chance guessing does NOT follow probability theory?

- Carl

*Poker outcomes often rely heavily on "tells" and bluffing.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Actually, true guessing in real-world situations follows mathematical distributions precisely. If it did not,

then the whole field of statistics would be bogus.

You said it Carl...Art

 

[Mike(Mont)]

The odds in card games depend on how the cards are shuffled. Last I heard there is no true random number generator nor perfect card shuffler. Plenty of crooked ones, though. Anyone who works with cards can a good idea where the cards are.

As for the coin "guess" if you want near random odds you need a machine to guess the coin, not a human. In Oroblanco's case, he already had a coin, it wasn't a random pick to start with. He knew what the date was, may have even chosen it. You want an idea, at least compare the results of a human vs a machine. The machine will not get the same results because assuming it is near random it will have little bias. A good dowser shouldn't have much either, but a non-dowser has plenty. The whole problem with human forced choice guessing is they tend to make a conscious effort. Dowsing does not use the intellect. That's not to say that some supposedly non-dowsers completely use their intellect. The whole guessing game cannot be fenced-in, nor can dowers be guaranteed not to be.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Gambling (but not necessarily poker*) is an excellent example of statistics at work. Vegas casinos design their games in such a way that the mathematical odds work out about 55% in their favor in the long run. That way, gamers get the illusion of winning (with an occasional Real Winner) while the house is always the winner at the end of the day. Do you believe that the actual statistical distributions of gaming results does NOT follow what the casinos calculated when they designed the games?

Well Carl.....Most Casino games do follow a statistical distribution. This is because there is no way to change the results without cheating. They have an advantage because they have years of statistics to provide the numbers. They can tell you the odds at which each dealer will operate. They have real facts and information. They have tapes of each bet placed and what the results are. There are no Random odds in Vagas just real facts. No guessing ....Art

 

[Oroblanco]

Mike(Mont) wrote:

Dowsing does not use the intellect.

Ouch! True though.

Oroblanco

 

[Carl-NC]

Well Carl.....Most Casino games do follow a statistical distribution. This is because there is no way to change the results without cheating.

You're right, Art... casino games follow a statistical distribution, until someone cheats. The statistical distribution that they follow is exactly what can be calculated using probability theory, just as I did in this thread for the date test. This is true, even though gamblers are making a conscious effort to "beat" the system, and therefore make choices that are heavily biased. Turns out that it just doesn't matter at the end of the day.

They have an advantage because they have years of statistics to provide the numbers.

This is not an advantage, it is just a confirmation that the odds that were calculated when the game was designed are correct. Probability theory is upheld every day in Vegas, every week in Lottos, and before every football game. It Really Works.

We were fortunate when Sandsted claimed the ability to dowse the dates on coins, because it is such an easy claim to design a test for. Although the statistical calculations are difficult, I've gotten the numbers exceedingly close and verified with simulation results.

Now here's the good part... this test is so easy to set up, that anyone reading this forum can Do It*, and see for themselves what kind of results they get when guessing. Don't believe that real-world guessing follows probability theory? Then try it for yourself, and see! Don't take ol' Carl's word for it, when you can look, and see for yourself. It's easy!

- Carl

*You don't even have to find 40 different coin dates... take 40 cards from a playing deck, number them on the face side from 1 to 40. Place them face down on a table, and thoroughly mix them up. Pull 10 cards out, and try to guess the numbers, in order. See how your results compare to my calculated odds.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Art is right, the odds aren't one in a hundred. I think it would be a difficult problem to solve since you don't know how many coins are out there for each year. But if you could somehow find out, each year has a different probability of it's fraction to the whole.

Are you talking about Sandy's coin test, or the guessing we did at Oro's silver dollar?

 

[ClonedSIM]

We know the odds are 1 in 100 to get the date right in my first example. It's not a guess, and it is based on "real facts."

And where can one find these "real facts"?

Oy vey, Art. It's math, buddy, not dowsing..... Okay, one more time. This is using my example, not the actual test.

You have 10 coins in front of you, each with a different date, from 1990 to 2000. You have to pick one from this 10. This choice gives the odds of 1 in 10. One coin from the row of 10. 1 in 10. Agreed?

Okay, with your one coin, you have to assign a date to it. You have 10 possible dates, from 1990 to 2000. This is, again, 1 in 10. Understand?

Now, you have a 1 in 10 choice of coins and a 1 in 10 choice of dates, but this has to be done with only one coin. It's probability at play here, with 10 choices and 10 more choices, you have 100 possible combinations without knowing any other information about the coins. But you only get one guess. So your guess is 1 out of 100 possibilities. 1-to-100 odds. Real facts. Real math.

Oh, and to answer your question even more directly, try a 9th grade math textbook.

Do I get a comment from you on this one, Art? Try the math yourself, you'll see it uses "real facts"...

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Carl...Your Math it just fine. I don't see it as useful when used to prove something. I have read to many studies where some one has beat the chances of Random Odds only to be told they did not beat the odds by a big enough margin....Look at your charts..What are the odds to beat Random Chance. Is 1 in 181 or 1 in 328 better than Random Chance. I have ask for an exact number and it seems no one can give me one. It seems that it is no there. .Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Hey Carl...Your Math it just fine. I don't see it as useful when used to prove something. I have read to many studies where some one has beat the chances of Random Odds only to be told they did not beat the odds by a big enough margin....Look at your charts..What are the odds to beat Random Chance. Is 1 in 181 or 1 in 328 better than Random Chance. I have ask for an exact number and it seems no one can give me one. It seems that it is no there. .Art

Art...seriously! What the he!!, man?

I've answered this, more than once! Why can't you accept it? I said 6 right would be convincing, and Sandy said 40-60 percent as well. My answer of 6 fits not only Sandy beating the odds of random chance, but also lines up with what Sandy says he can do.

It's right here, in black and white, numerous times, and it's not going to change.

 

[aarthrj3811]

I have af1733 that has given an answer. How about you Carl?....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

I have af1733 that has given an answer. How about you Carl?....Art

Alright, thank you.

 

[Oroblanco]

Carl wrote:

We were fortunate when Sandsted claimed the ability to dowse the dates on coins, because it is such an easy claim to design a test for.

That statement makes it sound as if the skeptics have been sitting, waiting, almost like a hunter for his prey, for some dowser to make a claim that could then be "pounced" upon. Can you see how a dowser, who has faced the doubt and ridicule from skeptics, would be suspicious of your test, and your motives? Your web site does not help the case either, to encourage a dowser to try to prove things for even a large amount of money.

Oroblanco

 

[Carl-NC]

Carl wrote:

We were fortunate when Sandsted claimed the ability to dowse the dates on coins, because it is such an easy claim to design a test for.

That statement makes it sound as if the skeptics have been sitting, waiting, almost like a hunter for his prey, for some dowser to make a claim that could then be "pounced" upon.

Sandsted's claim is only the second one that is so easily tested via mail, without anyone having to travel or incur any expenses, and in a short time frame. Many other dowsers have come to this forum and made many dowsing claims. Ferinstance, Art has claimed that his rods will cross every time he steps on a coin. But Art refuses to demonstrate this claim in a test situation. Sandsted didn't refuse.

Can you see how a dowser, who has faced the doubt and ridicule from skeptics, would be suspicious of your test, and your motives? Your web site does not help the case either, to encourage a dowser to try to prove things for even a large amount of money.

It's not my problem if dowsers can't really do what they say they can do, and then try to blame me for their inabilities.

- Carl

 

[Carl-NC]

Look at your charts..What are the odds to beat Random Chance. Is 1 in 181 or 1 in 328 better than Random Chance. I have ask for an exact number and it seems no one can give me one.

OK, Art, let's take a look at this. Here is the distribution from 1000 simulations of guessing coin dates per the Sandsted criterion:



Can you tell me, from this plot, how many "hits" a person will achieve in a single test? By that, I mean "an exact number."

Can you tell me, from this plot, what dowsing result would beat random chance? Again, I mean "an exact number."

- Carl

 

[aarthrj3811]

No Carl...All I see is a chart with no exact numbers on it...Would you care to tell us how many exact coins Sandsted needs to date to beat the chances of Random Chance?....Art

 

[Carl-NC]

All I see is a chart with no exact numbers on it...

The horizontal axis is the number of correct guesses in a single test.

The vertical axis is the % probability of being correct.

So, from this plot, can you tell me how many correct guesses a person will achieve in a single test? Will they get 1 correct? Or 2? Or 3? What is the exact number they will get correct?

This is the same question you asked here.

- Carl