Girl's Feet Severed on Theme Park Ride (1 Viewer)

[BrianW]

Although it seems like it should, it doesn't quite work that way. It's intuitive to think that clustering of random events in time is aginst the odds, but it just isn't. Rolling a six-sided die, you would be correct to assume that rolling two 4s in a row is something of an unlikely event. But the same would be true for any combination of any two numbers, like two 1s, or a 3 followed by a 6, or a 5 followed by a 2. Any combination of two numbers (in order) is just as unlikely (and consequently just as likely) as rolling two 4s in a row. Yet when we see two 4s in a row, our minds want to think it's something special and against the odds, when it isn't.


It saddens me to think that I won't be able to keep up with the young girl's medical progress, and that the current tragic state will be the last I hear of this event. But I fully respect the family's request for privacy, and my heart goes out to them with deepest wishes for the fullest recovery possible.

 

[Michael_K_Sr]

Hate to be cynical, but I'm sure we'll hear about the medical procedure once some neighbor or schoolmate talks to the newsapers or more likely...the family themselves sell their tale to some television station.

 

[Henry Gale]

Brian, turn that frown upside down!
After a little adjustment period, I'm almost sure you'll get to see plenty of coverage on the young ladies miraculous progress on her old feet or some new titanium springs.

 

[BrianW]

Mmmmmmm... Titanium springs....

 

[Cees Alons]

True, of course.
On a somewhat lighter note: that's the Baron Von Munchhausen during a sea-battle, holding his head exactly at the impact spot of a canon ball, because "a canon ball hardly ever hits the same place twice".

Forgetting the fact that the canon obviously happens to be aimed at that spot that very moment: two incidents may have a low chance of occurring together (in whatever way), but after one of the two has already happened, that combination becomes less difficult and the chance of the next one happening is exactly as big as is would have been (alone!) without the first incident.


Cees

 

[Radioman970]

Nice attempt to get the blood & guts back in this "math class" thread where it belongs.

I'm annoyed by the family. Sure, they should have their privacy, but a lot of total strangers would love to know if the kid's feet were able to be reattached. We're losing sleep over this!!!

 

[Chris Lockwood]

> Authorities and the hospital have declined to say whether her feet were reattached.

I don't see how it violates their privacy to announce what happened with the surgery, since we don't know her identity.

I think I'd be worried about a lot more than privacy at this point.

If the operation was not successful, how long can they keep it quiet? How many girls are there that age without feet?

I assume the girl had friends- won't they figure something out?

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

It may be that reattachement surgery was attempted and they're still waiting to see if it was successful. From what I've read problems and complications can arise weeks later that require surgical amputation of the reattached limbs, and they may simply not want to get the hopes of friends and nieghbors up until they're sure of the medical outcome. Or if reattaching the feet wasn't possible the girl herself may need time to come to terms with that psychologically and in the meantime may not want the whole world to know what she rightly regards as her personal business. Of course people are going to find our eventually, in that case, even once she's fitted with prosthetics, but the family and the hospital may just be abiding by her wishes for the time being.

I'm as curious as the next guy, and certainly hope and pray for a good outcome, but I can think of many possible explanations for their reticence and don't begrudge it.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Holadem]

You know they are not?

What Joseph said.

--
H

 

[drobbins]

Update

 

[Joe S.]

But are roller coaster accidents completely random events? I would say that they are not and that human error plays a very significant roll.

For example, replacing the cables on a ride is expensive, but replacing them regularly makes the ride much safer. If you replaced the cables say once a week with new ones, then any accidents would truly be random (and possibly extremely rare.) But if you waited an indeterminate amount of time between each replacement (until they look 'worn' or say a set amount of time expires - 3 months), now it is not a random event. As the cables get older and more worn (but not worn enough to warrant costly replacement), the chances of an accident start accelerating. If park A replaces the cables once a week adn park B replaces them every 4 months, which park will have more accidents?

So if a technician checks the cables the night before and they are worn but judged "safe enough", then the cable snaps, was that a random event or a human failure? Hence, part of why they pay someone millions when an accident does occur. It's not just the bad publicity (as seen in this story, word gets out anyway), it's that they don't want their technicians in court describing in detail where the park draws the line on safety. That invites criticism, possible angry public demonstrations, and maybe even govt regulation.

NOTE: I'm not saying parks are unsafe or putting people at risk unneccesarily. I'm saying they have a huge vested interest in keeping their policies (whatever they may be) as quiet as possible. If the accidents were truly random, would they care as much? I don't think they would.

 

[PhillJones]

I'm sure your thoughts on the politics of out of court settlements are all quite right.

However, without checking any actual stats, I bet that theme park accidents are randomly distributed in time over all types of accidents and all parks. Sure, cables on vertical drop rides might be issue of the day at the theme park owners conference this year and nobody will be caught dead with a freyed cable but to quote an old adage, 'if it's not one thing it's another'. The next accident will be entirely unrelated probably and be a result of some other thing that somebody took their eye off for too long. With so many possible causes of an accident, in other words so many parameters to decide when a accident occurs, I bet it'll converge to a binomial distribution. In other words, it'll be random.

Not that I'm an actuarial mathematician, so I don't really know.

 

[Matt^Brown]

That is the reason I try to stay off the forum.


I really wish we this new information would have had some more news about the girl in it.

 

[TonyD]

well, you're posts dont look like they were posted while drunk.
you know i was just poking fun with that link i hope.

 

[Radioman970]

Thanks.

Does my heart good to know that the people of 6 Flags are concerned about the whole family of a girl who was severly injured on their manticulously inspected amusement park ride. We can all feel safe and sound now. :rolleyes

And....to the Lassiter family: sue them for everything you can get! And good luck on your daughter's recovery.

 

[Chris Lockwood]

> Does my heart good to know that the people of 6 Flags are concerned about the whole family of a girl who was severly injured on their manticulously inspected amusement park ride. We can all feel safe and sound now.

What do you want them to say? "We don't give a crap about the girl and hope she has a painful life."

Why do you assume they don't care?

What does "manticulously" mean, anyway?

 

[MarkMel]

I think it means done in a precise manly way.

 

[Henry Gale]

I think he meant metickleus.

 

[Radioman970]

I'm from Georgia. Grade me on a curve.

 

[MarkMel]

LOL