Here’s another calculation involving the odds of somebody winning the lottery twice. In 2015, John Talbot of University College London put the odds of this happening before 2034 at greater than 60%. http://www.statisticsviews.com/details/news/7684721/What-are-the-chances-of-winning-the-lottery-twice.html
Not for Erskine or Neville!
I watched a Youtube with some astoundingly unlikely coincidences. Unfortunately I didn’t bookmark it, but Googling finds other Youtubes of yet other coincidences.
But, as others have mentioned, there’s a problem with assessing probabilities.
If I properly shuffle a deck of cards what is the chance each 13-card hand will be all one suit? This longshot is a nonillion-to-one against, or a quadrillion-quadrillion-to-one against. (That’s a billion billion trillion in more familiar numbers.) The longshot is so unlikely that the observer who sees four 13-card suits can be quite confident the shuffle was rigged.
Yesterday, a shuffle produced these four hands:
AK85
Q62
KT4
KT8
432
AJ975
Q3
653
QT76
KT
AJ65
J74
J9
843
9872
AQ92
What were the odds against these four hands? The same billion billion trillion to one against! Was this shuffle rigged?
The hands just mentioned, though wildly unlikely, were not surprising. (I tried to Google “surprise information theory” or such, but most of the hits were using surprise in a surprisingly stupid way.)
The events of September 11, 2001 have to be some of the least probable events seen by the most people.
Would like to see what the odds in 1524 at the time of his first expedition were against Francisco Pizarro conquering the Inca Empire with less than 200 conquistadors.
I think it’s improbable that any one of us here would be able to give an authoritatively accurate analysis of what the least probable event would be. The most we could probably say would probably be “probably”. 
Last month I fiddled with my chicken tetrazinni casserole recipe, popped it in the oven, adjusted the temperature and what do you think popped out?
That’s right … a Boltzmann brain! What are the odds??
But, … meh.
Last week I fiddled with my tuna noodle casserole recipe, popped it in the oven, adjusted the temperature and what do you think popped out?
That’s right … another Boltzmann brain! What are the odds?!?
The novelty of having two Boltzmann brains floating around quickly wore off, however—they’re frickin’ pretentious gits and bicker constantly. No more casseroles for me. :mad:
I looked up “Boltzmann brain”. You’re doing it wrong.
It clearly stated “homogeneous Newtonian soup”, but what you have there are obviously two heterogeneous Einsteinian casseroles! (because casseroles are generally for special relatives).
Did they bet any quatloos on whether you would get indigestion?
A professor of mine once said that statistically improbable events occur all the time. For example, any particular outcome of a continuous process stated with great precision (distribution of rainfall or temperature across a country, weights across a herd of sheep or pile of bricks) will be highly unlikely relative to the set of outcomes that could have happened.
Exactly. A great many of the above are a variant on the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. Drawing a target around the point where the bullet hit after the shot. Million to one shots are assured.
In terms of actively looking for highly unlikely events, where ahead of time you know they are very unlikely, and finding one, perhaps the LHC might win. It creates zillions of collision events, and experimenters are trawling through the data looking for the zillion to one (or worse) event. So perhaps observation of the Higgs would be up there.
That’s the sort of thing I was looking for. Thanks!
Any other examples such as this would be great.