BREAKING NEWS: Scientists Find Evidence That Proves God Exists!?!!?!!!!

[Mangled*]

Just out of curiosity, why not? I think myself to be math-saavvy, but I don't quite understand this. At any given point in 3-dimensional space, you have some compound probability P(X) to reach your origin, which is a product of P1, P2, P3 ... PN, where P1 is the probability that you will move from your current position to location 1, then from there to location 2, etc. where location N is your origin. Of course, these trajectories (and therefore, their corresponding probabilities) are dependent on your location, so every time you move, P(X) will change.

Actually, never mind. I just realized that I'm confusing probability for empirical likelihood. "1 out of 100"  != 1%. I understand now what you mean: although the number of attempts will increase the probability that you will arrive at your desired result, at infinity the probability that you will not still exists (though is infinitesimal).

The probability is constant... It doesn't increase or decrease. We are talking about an infinite three-dimensional space, afterall... You can move infinitely far away from point A and never return just as much as an infinite number of moves can bring you back to it.

Theoretically:

If we say that each time you change direction you are making a new 'move'. The initial moves you make after you leave point A are potentially more likely to bring you back to A with a successive move, simply by reversing the direction of your previous move(s). Because you are 'closer' to A. So if you've made 2 moves from A you potentially aren't as many moves away from A than if you had made 50 moves. If we account that every move that can be made can be an infinite distance along an infinite trajectory or angle through an infinite space.

On the contrary any single move, with the right angle and distance would take you back to A anyway. Therefore the probability is constant because at any point your next move ALWAYS has a 1/∞ chance of taking you back to A.

[Smegma]

Clarification on the problem:

On the contrary any single move, with the right angle and distance would take you back to A anyway. Therefore the probability is constant because at any point your next move ALWAYS has a 1/∞ chance of taking you back to A.

It was probably my doing as I didnt describe it well enough, but this random walk problem is discrete in that it takes place on a Z^3 (3D integer space), and so you can only move in specific angles on each axis of course (0, 90, 180, 270).

The probability is constant

This could be correct depending on which probability you are speaking. If you are talking about the P(x) such that it will return to point A (origin) in an infinite amount of moves, it is constant. If you are talking about p(x, n) such that it will return to point A in some amount of moves n, this is not constant. In fact, for p(x,2) ~ 16.666% because your first moves takes you away and the second move gives you a 1/6 chance of completing the requirements right there. You can explore p(x,n) for any n, but it gets tedious real fast, but you could learn some interesting things about the problem.

[Mangled*]

Oh I see! I was thinking that the angles could be infinite in their fidelity and had no limits. So an angle of 18.51325316º would be just as valid.

[Antipathy]

Huh. Reminds me of my writing. All of everything, this one time. It vaguely representated prose written in a sardonic manner. Agile words dodging the subjects of divinity. Well. You know everything about the oneness, the likelihood of hindsight.

"...for it might end, you know," said Alice to herself, "in my going out altogether, like a candle. I wonder what I should be like then?" And she tried to fancy what the flame of a candle is like after the candle is blown out, for she could not remember ever having seen such a thing.

[Mangled*]

Huh. Reminds me of my writing. All of everything, this one time. It vaguely representated prose written in a sardonic manner. Agile words dodging the subjects of divinity. Well. You know everything about the oneness, the likelihood of hindsight.

"...for it might end, you know," said Alice to herself, "in my going out altogether, like a candle. I wonder what I should be like then?" And she tried to fancy what the flame of a candle is like after the candle is blown out, for she could not remember ever having seen such a thing.

You write pretentiously and nausiatingly.

Just sayin'.

[Antipathy]

I'm pretentious, yes. I may even exhibit exhibitionism. Who knows. Evil could be lurking within, smelling bad. What the buddhists of the old used to call malevolent comic relief, I take my role models from. I'm bad, yes. I'm bad right to and thru the bone and every other fiber of my figure out there. I'm bad like Jesse James. Ain't no crying involved in my methodology.

And if it just happened that as my art of creativity oscillated into your cerebral experience, the act of nauseanization was thoroughly intended, in its repulsive glory, snowpure as the innocence of a virgin mother.

[Antipathy]

I also take to my greatest humorous delight the fact that there exists an "intellectual group" within the Soldat Forums.

Please, gentlemen, now....

[Mangled*]

I also take to my greatest humorous delight the fact that there exists an "intellectual group" within the Soldat Forums.

Please, gentlemen, now....