Mafia: Baker Street [Game in progress]

There are several closely related results that are variously known as the binomial theorem depending on the source. Even more confusingly a number of these (and other) related results are variously known as the binomial formula, binomial expansion, and binomial identity, and the identity itself is sometimes simply called the “binomial series” rather than “binomial theorem.”

The most general case of the binomial theorem is the binomial series identity
(x+a)^nu=sum_(k=0)^infty(nu; k)x^ka^(nu-k),
(1)

where (nu; k) is a binomial coefficient and nu is a real number. This series converges for nu>=0 an integer, or |x/a|<1. This general form is what Graham et al. (1994, p. 162). Arfken (1985, p. 307) calls the special case of this formula with a=1 the binomial theorem.

When nu is a positive integer n, the series terminates at n=nu and can be written in the form
(x+a)^n=sum_(k=0)^n(n; k)x^ka^(n-k).
(2)

This form of the identity is called the binomial theorem by Abramowitz and Stegun (1972, p. 10).

The differing terminologies are summarized in the following table.
“binomial theorem” source
(x+a)^nu=sum_(k=0)^(infty)(nu; k)x^ka^(nu-k) Graham et al. (1994, p. 162)
(x+1)^nu=sum_(k=0)^(infty)(nu; k)x^k Arfken (1985, p. 307)
(x+a)^n=sum_(k=0)^(n)(n; k)x^ka^(n-k) Abramowitz and Stegun (1972, p. 10)

The binomial theorem was known for the case n=2 by Euclid around 300 BC, and stated in its modern form by Pascal in a posthumous pamphlet published in 1665. Pascal’s pamphlet, together with his correspondence on the subject with Fermat beginning in 1654 (and published in 1679) is the basis for naming the arithmetical triangle in his honor.

Newton (1676) showed the formula also holds for negative integers -n,
(x+a)^(-n)=sum_(k=0)^infty(-n; k)x^ka^(-n-k),
(3)

which is the so-called negative binomial series and converges for |x|<a.

In fact, the generalization
(1+z)^a=sum_(k=0)^infty(a; k)z^k
(4)

holds for all complex z with |z|<1.

Among his many other talents, Major General Stanley in Gilbert and Sullivan’s operetta the Pirates of Penzance impresses the pirates with his knowledge of the binomial theorem in “The Major General’s Song” as follows: “I am the very model of a modern Major-General, I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral, I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical, From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical; I’m very well acquainted too with matters mathematical, I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical, About binomial theorem I’m teeming with a lot o’ news-- With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.”

Asteroid 5048 (1981 GC)

Primary orbital elements:
Eccentricity: .1731030233366963 ± 5.9501e-08
Semimajor axis: 2.62722422510062 ± 1.5186e-08 AU
Inclination: 1.392925967124883 ± 5.8581e-06 degrees
Longitude of ascending node: 301.6908133375929 ± 0.00025342 degrees
Argument of perihelion: 272.6480796431704 ± 0.0002539 degrees
Time of perihelion: 2457204.463823692224 ± 9.0491e-05 Julian day (2015-Jun-30.96382369)

Derived orbital elements:
Perihelion: 2.172443768752297 ± 1.5445e-07 AU
Aphelion: 3.082004681448952 ± 1.7815e-08 AU
Mean anomoly: 220.2121935890816 ± 2.0358e-05 degrees
Period: 1555.407314212051 ± 1.3486e-05 days
Mean motion: .2314506282120522 ± 2.0068e-09 degrees/day

Absolute magnitude 13.1

Discovered 1981-Apr-01

And with that confirmation of Chronos’s scumminess, I looked back at his votes from Yesterday:

Chronos has 2 votes from wevets (177), Pleonast (468).
Chronos has voted for Mahaloth (104), Astral Rejection (237), Askthepizzaguy (237), [del]Captain Klutz (371-382)[/del], Pleonast (371).

I do get a townie lean on Pleo from these votes, to a lesser extent on Wevets.

Chronos did have a lot to say about our clues, most of it encouraging us to post clues, which just tends to confirm my conviction that we should keep them to ourselves.


I am disturbed by Mahaloth's vanilla claim and continued offers to be lynched.  I think Mahaloth is a better player than this.  If he were truly vanilla, he would be trying to get NK'd, not offering to be lynched.  And why did he claim in the first place?  Because he had 2 votes?  

**vote: Mahaloth**   as backup candidate 

SilverJan, I assumed Inner’s bet was similar to my own:

My post in which you thought I was saying all is lost was in reply to Pleo’s. It’s too late to go back to having a lynch between 2 candidates with unknown affiliation, because we know (or think we know) Chronos’s affiliation already.

OK then, Chronos! Thanks for that…

Texcat, if you are worried by Mahaloth’s eagerness to be lynched, why are you helping him?

I think there is still some more useful material to be extracted from today. Hopefully, my series of blunders can have some further positive results.

I am worried that his eagerness means that he is not a vanilla townie, but instead he is scum. Sorry, things that appear clear in my head, don’t always seem to come out clear in my posts.

Blunders, shmunders. What result could be more positive than dead scum? But yes, I agree there will be other useful material from today.

I guess I’m not convinced we really need another candidate today:

Vote Chronos

Unvote Askthepizzaguy

Unvote Astral Rejection

For emphasis, if we really need another candidate we can deal with that later.

With Chronos’ admission, and the desire for the bird in the hand:

vote Chronos

i guess that’s an admission.
vote Chronos

I get what you meant. Basically you think it’s reverse psychology.

Speaking of which…
** @DaphneBlack / any other detectives:**

There are two ways I’d like for me to be resolved.

  1. Scan me and put it to rest. That leaves only me being a Godfather. Which, come on. Examine how I’ve been playing this game, and it’s not for long term survival, which is how a Godfather has to play it, since they have a way of slipping past detective’s notice.

  2. Publicly declare that I shall never be scanned, and the way I’m resolved is by the lynch. That way nobody wastes a scan on a guy that they then reveal is innocent and is then nightkilled, resulting in a waste of a scan since it then becomes data you’re already aware of and is completely useless in solving the game.

If I am going to be lynched, decide that’s what’s gonna happen next, and do it next round, so I don’t waste any scans. Otherwise leave it alone. I’m not going to spend 3 4, 5 rounds in a row being a top lynch candidate.

I only escape situations like that when I’m scum. :smiley:

Now taking bets on Askthepizzaguy being scum.

Any takers?

Who wants to lose money today?

There we go. That should push any undecideds over the edge. :smiley:

I’m not going to publicly announce who I am targeting with my power(s), but rest assured you are on the shortlist, Pizza.

Can I bet?

:smiley:

You bet your head. :wink:

That makes me murder bait, which doesn’t waste a lynch, but it will waste your time.

That’s worse than wasting an early, more or less random lynch.

I’d rather eat a lynch than rob you of a scan. Scan someone else.

We already got a scumbag dead in Chronos, therefore town can eat one lynch.

Why that’s superior is because you might scan a scannable scumbag if you do not scan me. If you scan me, the reading will be innocent, and then I will end up dead shortly thereafter, telling you jack frigging diddley squat about the remaining living suspects.

I have to insist on being lynched over being scanned. It’s quite superior to the alternative.

OF COURSE THE BEST MOVE WOULD BE TO DO NEITHER

…but that’s too much to ask for the town. I’m the bamboozler after all.

Truly, if you end up scanning me Daphne, that will only hurt town’s efforts. I have to insist you direct your scan at anyone else.

Your goal with the scan should be to find anyone who scans as guilty, as opposed to a non-godfather game where scanned innocents is better.

I’m being dead serious and talking tactical situation now. So please hear me out.

Anyone who scans as innocent is still potentially the godfather. Which means if he’s not found by sheer luck and blind lynching someone, eventually what’s going to happen is you have to start lynching from the “already scanned” pool. Then, your true worth to the game which is the ability to hunt down scannable guilty parties, is wasted, utterly wasted. If all you end up finding with your scans is innocent, innocent, innocent, that doesn’t tell you a damned thing until Moriarty is dead. It’s like your scan is useless.

However, flip the script. If you locate all the scannable scumbags with your power, then we just have Moriarty remaining. It’s easier to hunt down / process of elimination on one guy than a whole scum crew.

And, if by some chance Moriarty’s godfather power is removed, then what happens is, you have fewer people who scanned innocent that you then have to go back and re-scan.

Fewer people we are forced to lynch that you’ve already scanned, and fewer people you’ve already scanned that you then have to go back and re-scan is superior.

Furthermore, the power of the Godfather is to be able to argue that you shouldn’t be lynched because hey, you scanned innocent, and therefore, shouldn’t be lynched until the scannable scumbags are all dead, which is who knows when.

If the Godfather is lynched without being scanned, that’s way, way better for town. That renders the Godfather power useless, and makes your scan far, far more valuable, because then any remaining scanned innocents can be considered truly known as innocent.

If the votes won’t peel away from me until I’m scanned, that forces a bad lynch or a bad scan. And it still offers zero guarantee that I don’t get lynched later anyway, if Moriarty isn’t found. And any time a person you scanned ends up dead, that is one additional “night” your scan has told you nothing about the living players remaining. Ideally, the folks you scan should be still alive.

If a guy will be lynched unless he’s scanned, the proper policy is to simply lynch him. Otherwise too many questions remain, and then he’ll wind up dead anyway.

The only way your scan does you any good is if you scanned me guilty, and people didn’t want to lynch me in the first place, right? Well if people already think I’m guilty, then it is as though you’ve already got a guilty scan result.

Therefore, confirming what town already thinks wastes your time, and convincing them otherwise won’t keep me alive for very long anyway. There’s just no possible way your scanning of me helps me or you. None whatsoever.

Too long didn’t read, in summary:

Confirming what town already thinks or strongly suspects does zero good.

Telling town something that they would not figure out on their own? That’s **far **better.

I’m going to go back to posting memes now.

Thanks for listening.

This post is too short. Where’s the 8000 words of text?? I’ve come to expect certain standards from you, Askthepizzaguy.

Hey, Pizza. Friend. Step outside the box for a minute.

Maybe you don’t know how my power(s) work. Maybe “scanning” you might be useful after all.

I will not be drawn! Deal with it.