leeroyjenkins wrote:I'm pretty sure this whole thing would get wrapped up pretty quick if folks' idea of "critical thinking" included taking a statistics class.

Cannot argue that.

Anyway, the reason the chance will never go to zero for that coin flip is because the function is asymptotic...approaches but never quite reaches it.

This is in fact the reason we use quantum mechanics to understand modern physics of particle systems.

One of the tricks we used to have to derive in statistical physics applications when first introduced to quantum mechanics is the equation for a tennis ball to go through a wall. That is, classical physics will show it never can happen. Quantum mechanics approach yields a non-zero but tiny chance that the ball will slip right through. Of course, we know we would never be able to get it to happen in a nanillion lifetimes.

Why?

One way to think of it is because classical physics is quantum mechanics as you progress the functional limit of the independent variable(s) toward infinity. Or--that it is a limit of our math systems such that using quantum mechanics to solve a bulk problem that is sufficiently at equilibrium is not correct.

So the stats will never show zero--but in actuality--the chance of being 60-40 after that many flips is essentially zero because we will never witness it happen.

Wow you guys are gettin down and dirty!