Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26006155-20200107155350/@comment-32182236-20200204214112

..Okay, I have another way of writing Bayes' Theorum. Tell me if it's easier to understand than the one I gave you before.

P=AB/(AB+CD)

Where:

P=The probability of the hypothesis being true after the new evidence is taken into consideration.

A=The probability of the hypothesis prior to taking this evidence into account

B=The probability of the evidence showing up if the hypothesis is true.

C=The probability of the hypothesis being false (prior to taking this evidence into consideration.)

D=The probability of the evidence showing up if the hypothesis is false.

We also have this identity to go by:A+C=1

This time, I'll have the hypothesis be that the coin was not rigged to see if counterevidence can be submitted just like regular evidence. If it can, it'll make using the formula easier.

Since the probability of the coin NOT being rigged was .999, I'll be using that for A.

P=.999B/.999B+CD

In the case where we have counterevidence, B and D basically swapped places, as B is now 1/2^12, and D is 100%.

P=.00024389649/.00024389649+.001

P=.00024389649/.00124389649

P=.19607458656

So about a 19.61% chance the coin isn't rigged, which equates to a 80.39% chance that it is. That's an exact match.

So counterevidence can just be submitted as normal evidence.

So I'll be editing out the part that says you need to swap H and not H:It just makes things more confusing, and is in fact entirely unnecessary! The revised post will be the one I follow.