Brent Meeker and Jesse Mazer and others wrote:
Well, lots and lots of complex mathematical argument on the two envelope
problem...
But no-one has yet pointed out a flaw in my rather simplistic analysis:
(1) One envelope contains x currency units, so the other contains 2x
currency units;
(2) If
-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 7:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
Brent Meeker and Jesse Mazer and others wrote:
Well, lots and lots
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05
Thanks, Kory, that takes care of my confusion.
The same to Jesse's post.
John Mikes
- Original Message -
From: Kory Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: observation selection effects
At 02:57 PM 10/10/2004, John M wrote
At 04:47 PM 10/10/2004, Jesse Mazer wrote:
If I get heads, I know the only possible way for the winning flip to be
heads would be if both the other players got tails, whereas the winning
flip will be tails if the other two got heads *or* if one got heads and
the other got tails.
I agree with
You're right, as was discussed last week. It seems I clicked on the wrong
thing in my email program and have re-sent an old post. My apologies for
taking up the bandwidth!
--Stathis
From: Kory Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: re: observation selection effects
Date: Sat, 09
At 07:17 PM 10/10/2004, Kory Heath wrote:
We can also consider the variant in which the Winning Flip is determined
after people decide whether or not to switch.
In a follow-up to my own post, I should point out that your winning chances
in this game depend on how your opponents are playing. If
Here is a similar paradox to the traffic lane example:
In the new casino game called Flip-Flop, an odd number of
players pay $1 each to gather in individual cubicles and flip a coin (so no
player can see what another player is doing). The game organisers tally up the results, and the
: observation selection
effects
Here is a similar paradox to the
traffic lane example:
In the new casino game called
Flip-Flop, an odd number of players pay $1 each to gather in individual
cubicles and flip a coin (so no player can see what another player is doing
Hal Finney writes:
Not to detract from your main point, but I want to point out that
sometimes there is ambiguity about how to count worlds, for example in
the many worlds interpretation of QM. There are many examples of QM
based world-counting which seem to show that in most worlds, probability
Stathis Papaioannou writes:
Hal Finney writes:
Not to detract from your main point, but I want to point out that
sometimes there is ambiguity about how to count worlds, for example in
the many worlds interpretation of QM. There are many examples of QM
based world-counting which seem to show
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Jesse Mazer wrote:
I don't think that's a good counterargument, because the whole concept of
probability is based on ignorance...
No, I don't agree! Probability is based in a sense on ignorance, but you
must make full use of such information as you do have.
Of
This has been an interesting thread so far, but let me bring it back to
topic for the Everything List. It has been assumed in most posts to this
list over the years that our current state must be a typical state in some
sense. For example, our world has followed consistent laws of physics for
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Sorry Jesse, I can see in retrospect that I was insulting your intelligence
as a rhetorical ploy, and we shouldn't stoop to that level of debate on
this list.
No problem, I wasn't insulted...
You say that you must incorporate whatever information you have, but no
more
Norman Samish writes:
QUOTE-
Assume an eccentric millionaire offers you your choice of either of two
sealed envelopes, A or B, both containing money. One envelope contains
twice as much as the other. After you choose an envelope you will have the
option of trading it for the other envelope.
-Original Message-
Norman Samish:
The Flip-Flop game described by Stathis Papaioannou
strikes me as a
version of the old Two-Envelope Paradox.
Assume an eccentric millionaire offers you your choice
of either of two
sealed envelopes, A or B, both containing money. One
envelope contains
I always forget to reply-to-all in this list.
So below goes my reply which went only to Hal Finney.
-Forwarded Message-
From: Eric Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:57:14 +1000
On Tue
a good day
John Mikes
PS: to excuse my lingo: my 1st Ph.D. was Chemistry-Physics-Math. J
- Original Message -
From: Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Everything-List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 6:19 PM
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
-Original Message
Original Message
Subject:
Re: Observation selection effects
Date:
Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:29:54 -0400
From:
Danny Mayes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
References
Brent Meeker wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 6:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
Brent Meeker wrote:
On reviewing my analysis (I hadn't looked at for about four
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 8:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
Brent Meeker wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 8:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Observation selection effects
If the range of the smaller amount is infinite,
as in my P(x)=1/e^x
example, then it would no longer
On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 19:31, Brent Meeker wrote:
I always forget to reply-to-all in this list.
So below goes my reply which went only to Hal Finney.
-Forwarded Message-
From: Eric Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Think about if the odd number of players was exactly
one. You're
Norman Samish:
The Flip-Flop game described by Stathis Papaioannou strikes me as a
version of the old Two-Envelope Paradox.
Assume an eccentric millionaire offers you your choice of either of two
sealed envelopes, A or B, both containing money. One envelope contains
twice as much as the other.
Hal Finney writes:
Stathis Papaioannou writes:
Here is another example which makes this point. You arrive before two
adjacent closed doors, A and B. You know that behind one door is a room
containing 1000 people, while behind the other door is a room containing
only 10 people, but you don't
Eric Cavalcanti writes:
QUOTE-
And this is the case where this problem is most paradoxical.
We are very likely to have one of the lanes more crowded than
the other; most of the drivers reasoning would thus, by chance,
be in the more crowded lane, such that they would benefit from
changing lanes;
On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 10:42, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Eric Cavalcanti writes:
QUOTE-
And this is the case where this problem is most paradoxical.
We are very likely to have one of the lanes more crowded than
the other; most of the drivers reasoning would thus, by chance,
be in the more
Eric Cavalcanti writes:
From another perspective, I have just arrived at the
road and there was no particular reason for me to
initially choose lane A or lane B, so that I could just
as well have started on the faster lane, and changing
would be undesirable. From this perspective, there
is no
Stathis Papaioannou writes:
Here is another example which makes this point. You arrive before two
adjacent closed doors, A and B. You know that behind one door is a room
containing 1000 people, while behind the other door is a room containing
only 10 people, but you don't know which door is
29 matches
Mail list logo
