Math Question Help

[StuartHopkin]

462 is correct I think though

[StuartHopkin]

That's why I said don't look at the first set. It's then 46656 to 1 because that's your total combinations.

As soon as you know what the first set is you have other considerations and it gets difficult.

norrr, it's only that to throw the exact same numbers in the exact same order. we're throwing 6 dice together

1 in 46656 is only true for 111111, 222222, 333333, 444444, 555555 and 666666 as there's only one possible way of throwing them

So the answer to the OP is that it's impossible to know the odds until you know what the first set of numbers is?

I dont think this is impossible

[StuartHopkin]

This is an absolute nightmare to work out because your odds on the second set depends on the outcome of the first set.

that's what makes it easy to work out, we know set 1 so it's a simple matter of working out the number of permutations

No we don't.

OP gave set 1 as an example. It could actually be any one of 46656 combos.

yeah but we're all answering the example question

love that your last 2 posts were accepting what hopkin wrote and disagreeing with what I wrote when we'd both made the exact same point

I wasn't accepting what Hopkin said.

I just couldn't be arsed arguing with Hopkin because all he did was repeat a previous post.

My 'fair enough' was just accepting that he's happy to be wrong.

Your point was easier to counter because you put up an argument against what I'd said which gives me something worth responding to.

Are we retracting any of this now?
I thought I had explained it a bit more in the second post so a man of your intelligence would get it.
That was the bit I am happy to be wrong about.

[zerofive]

lol... i lost the cunting game anyway (its farkle on facebook)

You're not allowed to spark a five page discussion and confuse a bunch of simpletons and then fade into the shadows.

[gatso]

hoping that's right. there are 462 unique sets of numbers that we can make with 6 dice if we ignore the order

Is this not wrong also as the chance of the first set being certain numbers is higher than other sets of certain numbers?

I'm really not sure. the 462 and the 46,656 are right, just not sure how we should be combining them or indeed if the 462 is even relevant

[StuartHopkin]

hoping that's right. there are 462 unique sets of numbers that we can make with 6 dice if we ignore the order

Is this not wrong also as the chance of the first set being certain numbers is higher than other sets of certain numbers?

I'm really not sure. the 462 and the 46,656 are right, just not sure how we should be combining them or indeed if the 462 is even relevant

I think the 462 is relevant, but you need the odds of rolling each of the 462 numbers and then use this to weight the various probabilities of matching the original numbers?

[EvilPie]

This is an absolute nightmare to work out because your odds on the second set depends on the outcome of the first set.

that's what makes it easy to work out, we know set 1 so it's a simple matter of working out the number of permutations

No we don't.

OP gave set 1 as an example. It could actually be any one of 46656 combos.

yeah but we're all answering the example question

love that your last 2 posts were accepting what hopkin wrote and disagreeing with what I wrote when we'd both made the exact same point

I wasn't accepting what Hopkin said.

I just couldn't be arsed arguing with Hopkin because all he did was repeat a previous post.

My 'fair enough' was just accepting that he's happy to be wrong.

Your point was easier to counter because you put up an argument against what I'd said which gives me something worth responding to.

Are we retracting any of this now?
I thought I had explained it a bit more in the second post so a man of your intelligence would get it.
That was the bit I am happy to be wrong about.

Because of this:

2592/1

(I think   )

and this:

its a game of dice where the dice are all thrown at once

Yeah then I am pretty sure its 2592/1

and this:

Sigh

Nobbed it the first time

3110.4/1

also a bit of this:

Bare with me and its easily sorted, however it is obviously only expressible as a formula

as well as combining this:

hoping that's right. there are 462 unique sets of numbers that we can make with 6 dice if we ignore the order

Is this not wrong also as the chance of the first set being certain numbers is higher than other sets of certain numbers?

with this:

462 is correct I think though

I don't think I'll retract anything just yet.

Thanks for giving me the option though.