I was walking up town at lunch today, listening to music in my own little world. I passed another person who was likewise listening to music. I wondered what were the chances that we’d be listening to the same song.
Then I thought of this: If I had to walk the earth, listening to music, and I had to stop each person I met who was also listening to music, and ask them what they were listening to… If I had to do that until I found somebody who was listening to the same song at the same time I was…(follow that so far?) would I have a greater chance of success if I continually listened to the same song, over and over, until I found somebody who was also listening to that same song… or would it be better for me to randomly listen to songs, hoping to meet somebody who also randomly was listening to the same song at the same time?
I need to know.
I think it would work better if you listened to the same song continually. Alas, by the time you encountered another Ipod person listening to the same song as you, you would be quite insane. You may be insane now….
Also, my co-worker suggests there is likely a federal grant available that will allow you to study this question?
You could always go to audioscrobbler and look up the most popular songs in a given geographical area.. but that’s probably cheating.
You could always go to audioscrobbler and look up the most popular songs in a given geographical area.. but that's probably cheating.
I’m inclined to think, too, that the same song playing on one system would likely yield a better chance at success. But, then I think (in my limited way) about probability theory and think that perhaps each instance, each meeting, should be taken as separate events, and “the same song playing” then becomes less of a factor.
Insanity is surely the most likely result.
And while there are no rules to this experiment, audioscrobbler (or is it ‘scrabbler’?) does seem like cheating.