3 ms·
I know right? I don't blame them for getting it wrong at first glance-- I'm pretty sure 999 out of 1000 humans would. But the mathematics of the probabilities c
by savanaly 12y ago
I know right? I don't blame them for getting it wrong at first glance-- I'm pretty sure 999 out of 1000 humans would. But the mathematics of the probabilities can be written down on a napkin they are so simple, so how was no one able to convince these scientists with a clear, concise technical proof? They really needed a computer simulation, as I've seen it claimed?
- function_seven 12y ago> But the mathematics of the probabilities can be written down on a napkin they are so simple, so how was no one able to convince these scientists with a clear, concise technical proof? I'm even more appalled that no one tried, you know, actually running the game. Have someone take a quarter and two pennies, mix them up under cups, let you choose one, show you a penny, then switch or not. Repeat several times. Switch places. When you're playing the role of Monty, the truth will reveal itself...
- MichaelGG 12y agoI have a close friend that was incensed about my explanation about how he was misunderstand. He even ran a broken simulation that showed he was right. When I corrected his source code with detailed comments, he further accused me of trying to fool him and make fun of him. Didn't speak to me for a month. Bizarre. But I suppose this kind of thing that goes against instincts can really upset people.