Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 07:20:59 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?
Yes
No
It doesn't matter

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: [Brain Teaser] Three doors  (Read 2259 times)
hedgy73
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1077



View Profile
April 06, 2015, 11:42:48 AM
 #41

That's very clever thanks for sharing this quiz Smiley. On the Wikipedia link you've shared this graphic explains it well:



I can actually understand how it works now Grin.
You get merit points when someone likes your post enough to give you some. And for every 2 merit points you receive, you can send 1 merit point to someone else!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714677659
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714677659

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714677659
Reply with quote  #2

1714677659
Report to moderator
patt0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694
Merit: 1005


Betting Championship betking.io/sports-leaderboard


View Profile
April 08, 2015, 09:55:58 AM
 #42

@(oYo) I'm not going to insist more after this, but let me just say this: you can't see the problem as being separate in before and after the host opens the doors. If you do it's like you're starting the game at that time. But you didn't, you have to start when you choose the first door. And you have to see that the host doesn't choose 2 random doors. He chooses your door to leave closed and another one that has the prize if you missed. Your door here has 33% chance of having the prize.
So when the host opens the empty door, you are right in saying that it has 0% chance of having the prize. But you don't distribute its probability equally to the 2 doors remaining. You add it to the other door the host chose. That door has 66% chance of having the prize, not 50%. The one you chose has only 33% as before.

If it isn't like this, then how do you explain the image that was posted above and that others talked about already?

That's very clever thanks for sharing this quiz Smiley. On the Wikipedia link you've shared this graphic explains it well:



I can actually understand how it works now Grin.

Like this you win in 2 out of 3 situations if you change to the other door. So if the position of the car is always random you have a 66% chance of winning.

@criptix ah sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying.

(oYo)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 500


I like boobies


View Profile WWW
April 08, 2015, 02:43:18 PM
Last edit: April 08, 2015, 08:26:54 PM by (oYo)
 #43

@(oYo) I'm not going to insist more after this, but let me just say this: you can't see the problem as being separate in before and after the host opens the doors. If you do it's like you're starting the game at that time. But you didn't, you have to start when you choose the first door. And you have to see that the host doesn't choose 2 random doors. He chooses your door to leave closed and another one that has the prize if you missed. Your door here has 33% chance of having the prize.
So when the host opens the empty door, you are right in saying that it has 0% chance of having the prize. But you don't distribute its probability equally to the 2 doors remaining. You add it to the other door the host chose. That door has 66% chance of having the prize, not 50%. The one you chose has only 33% as before.

If it isn't like this, then how do you explain the image that was posted above and that others talked about already?

That's very clever thanks for sharing this quiz Smiley. On the Wikipedia link you've shared this graphic explains it well:



I can actually understand how it works now Grin.

Like this you win in 2 out of 3 situations if you change to the other door. So if the position of the car is always random you have a 66% chance of winning.

@criptix ah sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying.
That graphic is a misrepresentation of your choices (like I've already stated), unless of course you're retarded and insist on choosing the revealed door. Just eliminate the line with the revealed door and you'll automatically understand why there's a 1/2 chance, not 1/3. Fudging the percentages to make it seem like one choice now has a 66% chance is a semantic fallacy. Unless you picked the revealed door to begin with, the only thing you accomplish by switching doors is making more work for yourself.

The following riddle is also a masterpiece of equivocation. The trick to solving this riddle is in simply understanding this fact.
Quote
Three men rent a hotel room. Each pays $10 for a total of $30 spent on the room. The next day the hotel owner tells the three men that they over paid for the room as it only costs $25. The three men tell the owner to give them each a dollar back and he can keep two dollars.

If you do the math, each man paid $9 a piece for the room for a total of $27. The owner kept $2 which brings the total to $29.

The question is where did the other dollar go?

deeprocks
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 87
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 13, 2015, 10:58:41 AM
 #44

This is the MONTY HALL PROBLEM. Just Google it.

Rmcdermott927
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2254
Merit: 1140


View Profile
April 13, 2015, 03:53:18 PM
 #45

But there could be nothing at all right?

patt0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694
Merit: 1005


Betting Championship betking.io/sports-leaderboard


View Profile
April 13, 2015, 05:49:33 PM
 #46

But there could be nothing at all right?

No, there is always a prize behind one of the doors.
And the others have nothing, or 1 satoshi like OP said, or a goat xD


 Behind one door is 1BTC, behind the others, 1 satoshi. You pick a door, say #1, but you can't open it yet.


yummyransom
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
August 24, 2015, 10:23:32 PM
 #47

Yes you should switch it.

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!