Total bullshit

Status
Not open for further replies.
an experimant

my dad was a bit disbelieving, so we ran an experimant, using cups and a 2p coin. we ran it 40 times, 20 where i swapped, and 20 where i didnt swap. here are the results:

where i didnt swap, i got the coin 6/20 times

where i did swap, i got the coin 17/20 times.

so it seems it is right, however hard to believe it is. amazing
 
joshd said:
hmmm.... surely it should be a 50:50 chance? once there are two doors, you know the car is in one, and the goat is in the other. surely you should treat the whole thing as only being two doors, as you know one of them will get discounted anyway.

dude, [SNIPPED], no offense, but this isn't 3rd grade probablility...

"This is not an example of simple probability (suppose there are two doors, therefore there is a 1 in 2 chance of the car being behind either of the doors). This is an example of conditional probability: what is the chance of something happening, given that something else already has. "
 
Well now think of this when you get down to 2 doors out of 100:

Door 1: Chances of being the winner 1 out of 99

Door 2: Chances of being the loser 1 out of 99

The odds are the same.
No Longer is this simple probabilty.
 
The way I think about it is that the key point is that once you've picked one door, there are three possibilities for the other one. There are only THREE arrangements of two goats and a car that can exist in this situation.

1. You picked the car, the next revealed door can be either goat and changing your choice you will lose, keeping your choice you win.
Win by keeping.
2. You picked the first goat, the revealed door has the other goat and changing yoru choice you win, keeping your choice you lose.
Win by changing
3. You picked the other goat, the revealed door has the first goat and changing your choice you still win, keeping your choice you lose.
Win by changing


I (and most other people who posted in this thread) haven't said anything that hasn't already been said here or on the website, but re-reading an explanation described even *slightly* differently (at least for me) always sheds new light on a concept.


I haven't ever thought about this one before, thanks for that, Major.
 
no we're not, we're just using our brains... if that's a waste of time for you then you must be a *******
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom