[–] GoofyGrape 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

I was expecting somebody doing something stupid.

[–] goyphobic 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Same. I came for a chimpout and I'll be goddamned if I leave without one. Don't make me smash through this plate glass window and smear feces on the wall.

[–] Pulverizor 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

[–] truthwoke33 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

WORLD STAR NIGGA! WORLD STAR NIGGA! OH SHIET NIGGA! records in vertical

[–] KnightFalcon 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

<nerd mode>

wouldn't this just be the binomial distribution? The bell curve would be the Gaussian, which uses exp(-x^2). I think this is the binomial, not the Gaussian, and therefore is not the bell curve. But yes, in the limit the binomial distribution approximates the Gaussian, so in the limit, the statement would be correct.

</nerd mode>

[–] buncha_cunts 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Out of chaos, comes order. The balls go to a random location but since there's so many, you get a reliable curve like that.

According to the video this is from, the larger the sample set is in a binomial distribution, the closer you get to a normal distribution. In this case there are 3,000 little metal balls, and each number in the hexagons represents the number of paths a ball can take to get to that location. The fibonacci sequence gets involved when you draw diagonals from every number on the left and add up the numbers that diagonal crosses through.

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=UCmPmkHqHXk

[–] KnightFalcon 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

"the larger the sample set is in a binomial distribution, the closer you get to a normal distribution"

exactly. That's why I said it's not the bell curve, but it approximates it in the limit.

[–] downvotesattractor 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

No, this is going to be a Gaussian distribution. You are correct that at each step, the probability of outcomes is a binomial distribution. However, this experiment adds up multiple outcomes of binomial distributions.

That makes this a demonstration of the fantastic “Central Limit Theorem” which basically says that irrespective of the original probability distribution (binomial in this case), when you sum up the results of lots of experiments, the sums will form a gaussian curve.

[–] KnightFalcon 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

well, that's why I said "in the limit". It's NOT a Gaussian EXCEPT in the limit.

[–] DegenerateAF 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's been a while since I studied probability so it'd be pointless for me to even try to approach anything with some pure nice math but from what was demonstrated in the video each row of pegs there represents one row of the Pascal triangle (used for binomials) and I've counted a total of 12 rows. Using this website to get the 12th row and then plotting it into a graphic program you get this curve. I'd say that's close enough.

[–] KnightFalcon 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

yepp, as I said, the binomial distribution approaches the Gaussian in the limit.

[–] Greasy 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I gotta say, that GIF was not what I was expecting from a link with that title on this website.

[–] JoeKerr 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

yeah but i am an outlier...i am special -everybody

[–] SpeshulSnowflaek 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Yea but 0.3% of them are actually right

[–] The_Exodite 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That's actually brilliant. Simplicity of complex concepts, combined with scientific repeatability.

[–] Deplorablepoetry 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Plinko intensification

[–] kjell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

More of a path of least resistance.

[–] I_Merc 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

*PDF illustrated

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)