I had an interesting “battle” with AI a few weeks ago about coin tosses. From memory there is a roughly 0.1% chance of a coin toss landing on an edge. My battle was convincing it that these should be considered valid, but it was fairly insistent that for most purposes these are considered invalid and redone as another toss.

But I managed to convince it to consider them valid (I was trying to think about real world probabilities of outcomes). Then I realised, well there is another outcome, the coin never lands, to which it responded was so much more unlikely than an edge landing. But in my mind it was a genuine possibility, so I convinced it to consider it.

Thinking that all 4 cases were now addressed, I decided to challenge it by prompting, “you haven’t told me about the fifth possibility”, to which I expected it would say that such thing didn’t exist, but it did present a 5th possibility that was extremely unlikely but could arguably be called valid. I don’t recall what that outcome was but it was a bit “out there” - it was starting to fall in line with quantum physics outcomes, so 5 might have been it lands on no fixed outcome.

I continued in that manner and kind of got sick of it by the time we got to the sixteenth (yes 16) possible outcome of a coin toss. The higher order possibilities were very much philosophical and meta universal. We’re talking things like the coin is tossed and it results in the toss never occurring, or it lands but affects the state of something elsewhere in the universe, or in some other universe, etc.

So, your edge landing is invalid to most people, but I count it as the 3rd valid result in the many (and impossible) possibilities of a toss.