No, I'm not pointing to you.  It's a general "you," though at this 
point, I'm surprised that no one has taken up my offer.  Especially the 
people who claim that the probability is even at 1/2 and 1/2.

At the end of this, I'll even give back the money that you lost if you 
concede that the probability is indeed 1/3 and 2/3.  Look, there's no 
money lost here.  I'm giving people who believe that the probability is 
1/2 and 1/2 a risk free opportunity to prove themselves, and make a 
little money while they're at it if they're correct.

Tyson Mao
MSC #631
California Institute of Technology

On Dec 28, 2005, at 2:25 PM, Gustav Fredell wrote:

> Hey,
>
> You're not pointing on me when you say "you", do you?  I'm all with you
> (and pretty much the rest of the world) on this.  I now my statistics
> and probabilities well. University well :)
>
> /Gustav
>
> Tyson Mao skrev:
>
>> It's a hilarious idea, but with the sad undertone that this discussion
>> has even gone this far.  The probability of winning the game if you
>> switch the door is 2/3.  We make several assumptions:
>>
>> No one is "out to get you."
>> The host offers you the switch every single time.
>> The host knows which door the prize is behind.
>> Psychics are full of crap.
>>
>> Just play the game yourself.  This "law of large numbers" not applying
>> is false.  Probability doesn't mean that something will or won't
>> happen, it's how often it should happen.  If we carry out an infinite
>> number of tests, well, and I think it's called the central limit
>> theorem but I'm not certain, the probabilities should even out to 
>> about
>> 2/3 and 1/3.  If you do it 1000 times, the probability will generally
>> come out to 2/3 and 1/3, but it won't be exact, and it could come out
>> weird... you could win 1000 times in a row.  At the same time, I could
>> tunnel through a brick wall.  That's probability.
>>
>> Play the game yourself.  Work out the probability, read the actual 
>> text
>> of the problem as stated on that website, and if we can agree on the
>> text of the problem, and the manner of which the game is played, there
>> is no doubt that probability is 2/3 and 1/3.  There is no +epsilon or
>> -epsilon because for the sake of a math problem, no one is right 
>> handed
>> or left handed.  No one has a preference, pure randomness is possible.
>>
>> Honestly, if you were playing the game, would you actually stay with
>> the door you chose because you believe the probability of you winning
>> is 1/2?  If so, you deserve to lose that car.  In fact, why don't we 
>> do
>> this.  I'll be the host of this game and I'll give you 100 trials.  
>> The
>> prize behind the door in my game will be $5 USD.
>>
>> Then, you be the host, and you give me 100 trials.  The prize behind
>> the door in your game is $4 USD.  I'll switch the door every time, and
>> you keep your door every time.  If the probability is 1/2, I think you
>> stand to make $50 USD in this game.  Who's up for it?
>>
>> I'm putting up money here.  Those who are convinced of their answer
>> should step up.  I'm convinced of my answer, and I'm putting my money
>> where my mouth is.
>>
>> Tyson Mao
>> MSC #631
>> California Institute of Technology
>>
>> On Dec 28, 2005, at 1:00 PM, Gustav Fredell wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thats a hilarious idea. Go Tyson! I just wish I could be there. I 
>>> have
>>> a
>>> certain tactic I'm sure works, unless you pull the Lindsey Lohan card
>>> mentioned by Marco.
>>>
>>> /Gustav
>>>
>>> Tyson Mao skrev:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm going to set up this game, but instead of a car as a prize, as 
>>>> I'm
>>>> obviously not that wealthy, I'll give away free cubes.  We'll do 
>>>> this
>>>> in San Francisco during the break and we'll just call up random
>>>> members
>>>> of the audience who are there spectating the competition.  If I have
>>>> enough cubes, I'll do it 10 times.
>>>>
>>>> Tyson Mao
>>>> MSC #631
>>>> California Institute of Technology
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 28, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Rune Wesström wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Good thinking Stefan!" ? He is contradicting himself when saying:
>>>>> "you can gain some knowledge this way and be more sure that 
>>>>> changing
>>>>> would be better...but... the probability stays at 2/3". But if we 
>>>>> had
>>>>> a probability of 2/3 whithout this knowledge and then bettered it,
>>>>> how
>>>>> can we still stay at 2/3?  He is discussing the a priori
>>>>> probabilities
>>>>> before the first choise, *I* am discussing the probabilities before
>>>>> the second choice, that is, when the host has opened one door. 
>>>>> There
>>>>> is some concensus here that the probabilities are 1/3 or 2/3. But 
>>>>> if
>>>>> we accept the theoretical assumtion (Pochmann apparently does) that
>>>>> the host has an "easy" door and a "difficult" door and he chooses 
>>>>> the
>>>>> first with a probability of 1/2 + epsilon and the second with a
>>>>> probability 1/2 - epsilon (epsilon not 0), the result will be
>>>>> another.
>>>>> Ask mister Pochmann to calculate the probabilities for you. Mister
>>>>> Bayes may help him.
>>>>> R
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "pjgat09" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 5:41 PM
>>>>> Subject: [Speed cubing group] Re: (Off topic)3 doors...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats the best way I have heard it put for this entire dicussion.
>>>>> Good
>>>>> thinking Stefan!
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Greenwood
>>>>>
>>>>> --- In [email protected], "Stefan Pochmann"
>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> This doesn't make the argument wrong. Yes, you can gain some
>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>> this way and be more sure that changing would be better. But it
>>>>>> doesn't make you win more often when changing. The probability for
>>>>>> that stays at 2/3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I knew a similar case as yours, but here's a really extreme one:
>>>>>> After
>>>>>> you pick your first door, the host opens *all* three doors and 
>>>>>> let's
>>>>>> you stay or change. Even with this 100% knowledge (because you see
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> car), changing is successful exactly 2/3 of the time, namely in
>>>>>> those
>>>>>> cases where you were initially wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- In [email protected], Rune Wesström 
>>>>>> <rune.
>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A lot of  intuition!
>>>>>>> You guess on door #1. The host is staying in front of door #3. 
>>>>>>> Door
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> #2 is 2 meters away from him, nevertheless he opens that door. 
>>>>>> What
>>>>>> would you expect to find behind door #3? A goat?! (Let us exclude
>>>>>> double-crossing!).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "Stefan Pochmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 3:47 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: [Speed cubing group] Re: (Off topic)3 doors...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Changing wins if and only if you initially chose the wrong door, 
>>>>>>> i.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> e.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> two times of three.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you explain why your suggestion makes this wrong?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- In [email protected], Rune Wesström 
>>>>>>> <rune.
>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In real life the host is Not staying totally symmetrically in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> relation to the doors. (He is right-handed Or left-handed. Maybe 
>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>> has to take a halfstep to open a certain door etc.). If he now
>>>>>>> opens
>>>>>>> the "easiest" door, Not changing wins more often than one time of
>>>>>>> three. If he opens the other door, changing will win more often
>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>> two times of three.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ NOD32 1.1342 (20051228) Information __________
>>>>
>>>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>>>> http://www.nod32.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ NOD32 1.1342 (20051228) Information __________
>>
>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>> http://www.nod32.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



------------------------ 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/
 



Reply via email to