/lit/ - Literature

>>16070130
That's not what the Monty Hall problem is, dumbass.

>>16070130
100% probability goat is behind door two because the question already said the money is behind "one door" which is equal to "door one".

>>16070130
The positioning of the goat shows that the goat's behind is behind door 2. So there is indeed a goat behind each of the other two doors, but it's the same goat.
That means the other goat is not behind any of the doors, or it's behind door 1 and the $100,000 shares a door with one of the goats.
So the probability the other goat is behind door 2 is zero.

>>16070130
rolling
from 1 to 9 if the last number of this post is even then the goat is behind door 2 and if it is odd then goat isn't behind door 2

>>16070165
it's pretty clear from this post that there is no probability that goat is behind 2nd goat door

>>16070147
based 300iq poster

it's 50 fucking percent and no amount of sophistry will change that
now can we stop with the /sci/ bait and get back to shilling greeks

>>16070130
there is only one goat no? So the proability is zero.

>>16070213
(You)

>>16070147
Calm down Dionysiodorus

>>16070130
>Prove /lit/ is the smartest board
by reporting the thread

Can somebody explain to me how this isn't a fifty fifty

Why would there be $100,000 sitting behind a door?

>>16070248
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_paradox_(probability)

>>16070248
At the beginining when you choose a Door 1 the distribution for the money is
Door 1 (33%)
Door 2 or 3 (66%)
The problem then tells you out of the two doors you didn't pick, which doesn't have the money. It becomes
Door 1 (33%)
Door 2 (66%)
There's still a 66% chance it was behind one of the other doors, but now you know it's not behind door 3.

>>16070248
Door are like cats, do don't open them till you know, then you really know and they're open. Opened and the inside is displayed. There it is. Go get em, cowboy.

>>16070219
??????

>>16070248
You have a 1/3 chance of picking the money door with the first guess. The odds are 2/3 that it is behind the other 2 doors. Once you see the goat the odds are still 2/3 but there is now only one door worth opening.

>>16070278
midwit explanation from bugman who didn't really get it either intuitively but understood the surface mathematical explanation

>>16070311
or as i like to call it: bait

>>16070248
You have 1/3 odds of picking the money door with the first guess. The odds of the money being behind one of the other doors is therefore 2/3. Once you see the first goat those 2/3 odds are distributed to a single door, 2/3 > 1/3 so it makes sense to change your selection.

>>16070130
I don't care, I've already won a goat.

>>16070327
>>16070308

It's 50%.

Once door 3 with the goat is opened, the parameters change. You now have 2 doors, one of which conceals a goat, the other concealing money.

It would be like starting with two doors.

It's 50/50.

>>16070308
But why does the opened door remain in the problem?
>>16070311
Would you mind elaborating if you know any better
>>16070327
Why does it transfer to a single door?!

>>16070338
You are willfully ignoring information you already know. Your statement is not unlike saying
>You either win or you don't. It's 50/50

>>16070130
This problem is literally just the result of an undefined probability space.

>>16070341
>Would you mind elaborating if you know any better
no because it's an off-topic thread and you should all get bannd

>>16070343
Prove it.

>>16070147
This

>>16070343
>You are willfully ignoring information you already know
No you

>>16070350
Do you really want me to? The proof is quite concise, I can type it out.

>>16070359
>Do you really want me to?
No no please dont i realy dont wanna get btfoed!!!1!!1

>monty hall problem still confusing brainlets
Look, here's an easy way to prove it
>if you originally picked a goat and you switch, you will switch to the money
>if you originally picked the money and you switch, you will switch to the goat
>there is a 2/3 chance you originally picked a goat
>therefore if you switch there is a 2/3 chance of getting the money

>>16070348
Why should I get banned
I just stumbled on this thread and I'm really confused :(

>>16070365
All right.

>>16070369
>no proof
That's what I thought.

>>16070368
Because you're bumping an off-topic thread

>>16070370
Fucking based

>>16070366
look at this nigga don't know how time works XD

>>16070371
Then could you please explain it to me on a /sci/ thread or wherever it may be relevant?

>>16070130
Probability like causality is not an a priori category, Hume (pbuh) refuted the Monty Hall paradox

>>16070378
Yeah go open a thread there and I'll be with you in a sec

>>16070130
There is no goat

Can any of the fine mathematicians and logicians in this fine thread explain to how this is wrong:
You have a dog that has puppies
Your dog is a father
The dog, which is a father, is yours
The dog is your father
Therefore, your mother fucked a dog and the puppies are your brothers

>>16070379
>an a priori category
Imagine misunderstanding Kant's terminology so badly

>>16070384
oh my god

There are 100,000 doors. One has a million dollars behind it and the other 999,999 have goats behind them.
After you pick a door to open, 999,998 other ones are opened to reveal goats and one is left closed.
You are now faced with a choice between opening the door you initially chose or the other unopened door.
Which door should you open?

>>16070381
>>11983402

>>16070402
>100,000 doors
>the other 999,999

>op spams the same shit on every board
>>>/sci/

>>16070130
Why does the third door open?

If the 2nd door was opened at random it could be removed from the problem, but the 2nd door is always one in front of a goat. That is also why the odds transfer to a single door, if Monty Hall picked a door at random and showed you the money the odd of finding money behind the third door would be zero not 2/3.

Paul Erdős, one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, remained unconvinced until he was shown a computer simulation demonstrating vos Savant's predicted result (Vazsonyi 1999).

>>16070248
The question tricks you into thinking that it's about the probability that you picked the car, but that frame of mind will just confuse you. The question is really about what the probability that you have picked a goat. Here are the three outcomes

1.) you chose the car, the other two doors both have a goat behind them (33.3%)
2.) you chose goat #1, one remaining door has a car the other has goat #2 (33.3%)
3.) you chose goat #2, one remaining door has a car the other has goat #1 (33.3%)

All three outcomes have an equal chance (the numbering of goats doesn't matter and is just used to ease the explanation here). By the question, if either outcome 2 or 3 arises, switching will always get you the car. This is as if you chose the goat, and another goat is eliminated, then only the car remains. Thus if you chose a goat the first time around, then you are guaranteed to win the car by switching (as there is no other goat left). Whereas if you chose the car the you win of course.

So the question really is what is probability that you chose a goat? Outcomes 2 and 3 fulfill this, and its pretty intuitive that you have a 67% chance of getting a goat on your initial selection (because 2/3 doesn't evenly come out to 66%). So there is a 67% chance that you have a 100% to win by switching, and there is a 33% chance that you have a 0% chance. In other words there is a 67% chance that you switching will make you win, as there is a 67% chance that you chose a goat.

>>16070327
>>16070308
>>16070278
I blame fucking MatShat from game theory for popularizing this shitty explanation. It doesn't make any sense and only HS tier mathlets will repeat it because they haven't been to real academia where they realize the importance of an intuitive understanding.

>>16070440
This is good.

>>16070130
It is 50 / 50

>>16070453
Thank you anon

>>16070147
Based semantic grammar poster, pseud OP btfo

>>16070308
>Once you see the goat the odds are still 2/3
Wrong, you're removing an event from the event space once you reveal the goat. (2-1)/(3-1) = 1/2

>>16070130
Huh? I thought this was /biz/

>>16070440
See: (>>16070509)

1/3 as there is a 2/3 probability it's the money, and probabilities sum to 1.

>>16070130
When you initially pick you choose 1/3 meaning you have a 2/3 chance of being wrong. When you see the goat you get to switch so your odds are instead 2/3 chance of being right.

>>16070384
Your mother could have been artificially inseminated and had only bitches in addition to you.

>>16070425
He was right to be skeptical though. The problem, as it was formulated to him, was ambiguously worded, and the simulation was simply one interpretation of the events.

Okay all you smart kids:
>I chose the door with the (now) highest percentage;
>a different door opens as happened in the assumption.
what now?

How are there people on this fucking board who don't understand the Monty Hall problem?
Newshitters and /pol/shitters i assume

>>16070718
>>16070425

>>16070722
Getting a badly, or even wrongly worded problem and doubting it is not the same as not understanding the problem as it ought to be laid out.

>>16070722
Only a /pol/shitter would post this

>>16070509
>can't into fundamental fucking philosophy
>can't into fundamental fucking mathematics
why are you here?