--- In [email protected], Pedro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can I try this program? > > Pedro
Hi Pedro, I don't see why not, though I don't know where you can find an Atari 800. To do what I did you need to program the computer yourself. The fundamentals: Have the computer raise it's "game" counter by one, When the "game" counter surpasses 100 have the computer tell you the # of "wins." randomly generate a number, either 1, 2, or 3, have it ask you for input, You input the number one two or three, (You can figure out how to eliminate one of the other "doors" to choose again.) This must take the same amount of time every time, whether you guessed correctly or not. There must not be even a fraction of a second difference in this procedure viv a vis the correctness of your first choice. If there is, your mind can perceive it, and effect your second choice. Have a procedure for keeping or switching your choice. have the computer compare your input to the generated number, if they match, have the computer raise the "win" counter by one. Do *not* have the computer tell you whether you have won or lost except at the end. Start over Get the idea? Regards, David J > > d_j_salvia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu: > Gustav, > > --- In [email protected], Gustav Fredell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So you say it's a 100% that I win if I stay... awesome conclusion. Just > > awesome... > > Excuse me but i did not say that. > > > You can't drag the law of large numbers into this the way you are > doing. > > It has nothing to do with odds only being true for many trials or not. > > It merely states that if you do something enough times it will converge > > towards the "true" odds. Which in this case is 1/3 and 2/3. > > You just said that I can't can't put in the realm of the law of large > numberfs, and then you immediately defend its position within the > realm of large numbers. You can't have it both ways - either it > applies or it doesn't. > > The number of games is part of where you are going wrong. There is one > trial is the classic example - what effect does it have on one game? > None. In the same way that you cannot predict when a radiactive atom > will decay. > > > So what it > > in fact can be used for is to make the choices many times (like others > > suggested), ad them up and calculate odds that come nearer and > nearer to > > the real odds. In this way you can "prove" that the odds are in fact > 1/3 > > and 2/3 if you do it enough times. I challenge you to repeat Bob's 100 > > trials and and test your hypothesis against a 95% confidence > interval or > > so... > > I wrote a program in Basic on an Atati 800. Making a choice between 1, > 2, and 3 generated at random, I decided never to switch. Out of 100 > "games" I "won the car" 76 times. > > > With a solid year or so at university in probability and statistics and > > very confident in this. Ask all the probability/statistics > professors in > > the world if the odds are 1/3 and 2/3, and I strongly believe that the > > law of large numbers will make the will make this converge towards 100% > > agreeing. In fact I challenge you to ask a single > probability/statistics > > professor about this and let us all know about his/her answer. > > Why should I answer a challenge which is dependent upon how well > another person thinks? > > > Take on the one or both of the challenges above and then come back and > > say it's not true. I bet you my upcoming 2x2x2 average WR that you > can't > > do it ;) > > I'm sorry you lost the bet. You probably had your heart set on the > 2x2x2 average WR. > > Regards, > > David J > > > /Gustav > > > > d_j_salvia skrev: > > > > >Hi Duncan and Stefan and Pedro and Evan, > > > > > >Sorry, you guys, but you aren't correct. > > > > > >In probability there's a thing called the law of large numbers. If you > > >generate a long enough string of numbers "randomly" that eventually > > >you would have every digit the same number of times. N oparticular > > >number is favored. Your answer relies upon this law of randomness. > > > > > >What is actually wrong with the standard answere you gave is that one > > >is not dealing with a large number of choices, and, as such, odds *do > > >not apply.* > > > > > >I went to a site with the software and made my choice and did not > > >switch and I won. Doing it more than once is outside the boundaries of > > >the game. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >David J > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/MXMplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
