2 ms·
Did you not read the entire article on how scads of intelligent people got this wrong? And the explanation of why they got it wrong? It’s like following a map t
by ksenzee 2y ago
Did you not read the entire article on how scads of intelligent people got this wrong? And the explanation of why they got it wrong? It’s like following a map that carefully routes you around a sinkhole, and then stepping right into the sinkhole.
- ryao 2y agoI read the entire article. They all had defective reasoning. The player picked an option with a 1/3 chance of being right and a 2/3 chance of being wrong. The host’s action did not change that. However, the host’s action did make the remaining door have a 2/3 chance of being right and a 1/3 chance of being wrong.
- Izkata 2y agoThis is downvoted, but correct. Which door is right and which door is wrong doesn't get reshuffled when the host removes a wrong door, so even though there's only 2 doors left the chance isn't 50:50, it's still 33:67 - with the player having most likely chosen a wrong door.
- alexey-salmin 2y agoIt's not correct. P(A|B)=P(A) only if A and B are independent. Requiring independence in this case literally means "the host opens the door regardless of the player making the right or wrong choice first time". It's a core assumption in your calculations, without it the math is not correct.