Slashdot Mirror
Odds-on Science
utopia27 writes "According to article in New Scientist, a UK-based bookie will be taking bets for two weeks on major science benchmarks (specifically, odds of implementation by 2010). The ponies are life on Titan, 10,000:1,
gravitational waves, 500:1,
the Higgs boson, 6:1,
cosmic ray origins, 4:1,
and nuclear fusion, 100:1."
We can easily achieve nuclear fusion. The problem is controlling and sustaining it. It should read, "Fusion power plants, 100:1", not "Nuclear fusion, 100:1."
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 96331
I'm tired of bombing the universe
Actually, the link in the summary is wrong. Here's the actual article.
There are two ways of betting. The "proper", fixed odds way, and pool betting (sometimes known as tote or pari-mutuel).
Proper, english betting markets are formed by a bookmaker evaluating the probabilities of a selection winning an event. He will then write, say, 6/1 on a big blackboard. If lots of customers think this is a good price, they will all stick lots of money on it. "Oh, poo-pants", thinks the bookie, and cuts the price to 11/2, then 5/1. The customers that have already placed bets have 6/1, but future customers will get 5/1. Under this system, a bookie can, and frequently does, lose thousands on individual events.
The second way, which I believe is frequently used in the US (in the UK, pool betting is run as the Tote by the government under a monopoly), is pool betting. Say there are two selections, A and B. If £1000 gets staked on A and £100 on B, then A will have odds of 9/1 (or 10.00 if you're american) and B will have odds of 1/10 (or 1.1). In this method the bookie will never lose money, but isn't actually making any books!
Anti-flame barrier - I know I've over simplified, but I've tried to be concise.
I thought the Titan bet was a great deal until I RTFA and found out it's intelligent life on Titan. I think I'll pass.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack