Comments on: Understanding the Birthday Paradox https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/ Math lessons that click Sun, 22 Mar 2026 16:33:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: Shieldknight https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568411 Sun, 22 Mar 2026 16:33:02 +0000 http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568411 There is no 100% guarantee. My son is in high school, there are more than 600 kids in the high school and he is the only one with his birthday. There is always a chance that someone will be alone in this.

]]> By: VJ https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568374 Thu, 22 May 2025 11:08:57 +0000 http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568374 For 50% chance that there are no shared birthdays, the minimum group size is 23 - this is correct. For 99% chance, the correct answer is 57. The model in this page shows it as 59.

The mistake is because of the method. Kindly correct it. Already few comments have highlighted this.

]]> By: Roel Griffioen https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568360 Sat, 11 Jan 2025 01:47:17 +0000 http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568360 Why would you generalize e^(-((23*22)/(2*365))) to e^(-((n^2)/(2*T))) ? Seems to me that e^(-((n^2 - n)/(2*T))) AKA e^(-((n*(n-1))/(2*T))) would give a better approximation.

]]> By: SedoSama https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568352 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 03:52:48 +0000 http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-birthday-paradox/#comment-568352 In reply to OnkelDunkel.

unless you are a smooth talker.

]]>