/sci/ - Science & Math

>>1020932
THE ONLY WAY TO LOSE IS IF YOU PICK THE CAR THE FIRST TIME WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

dont do it OP, electricity is neat but you should get into clockwork instead. Mechanical machines are much more cool than electric circuits.

Its all just the oil companies trying to manipulate the market like they did a few years ago.

Oil is a renewable resource. (created by bacteria). We could create more of these bacteria if we wanted to.

The oil companies have an oligopoly on it all though. Its best to just move on anyway, oil is nifty and a good way to transport and store energy, but there are better solutions out there.

>>1020849
thats a homer simpson image macro

its implying that a door is both 50% and 33% likely to have the goat.

I am explaining why this is not the case, by trying again to get people to intuitively 'get' the problem

its not working because everyone is a moron. I thought it was 50/50 at first also but a few minutes of thinking allowed me to see why this is not the case.

its not 'both at once' because the doors themselves don't have any probability, its the choice that has probability. The doors themselves, the car door has a 100% chance of being the car door, the goat doors have a 0% chance of being the goat door.

the probability comes from the picking between them.

Because the first contestant had information about the doors that the second does not, he has a greater chance of picking the correct door.

the silvery mirror color

>>1020798
not that i can see.

>>1020770
but thats obviously 50/50 is anyone even discussing that?

>>1020742
Get a deck of cards. Pick one card to be the car

and two cards to be the goats


Pick a random card. Since you know you are going to switch throw that card out. If it was the car card then you lose.

If it was a goat card look at the two remaining cards. One is a goat, the other is a car.

Throw the goat card out since thats the door he opened.

you win.

The only way to lose if you always switch is if you picked the car the first time.

thats a 1/3 chance.

1/3 chance of losing = 2/3 chance of winning.

>>1020719
enjoy getting wiped out by an asteroid impact or a solar flare.

>>1020725
and if you have a 1/3 chance of losing, you obviously have a 2/3 chance of winning.

>>1020705
The host has to open a door.

He can not open the car door
He can not open the door that you have picked.

If you picked a goat door he must open the other goat door, meaning switching makes you win.

If you picked a car door he can open either goat door, switching makes you lose.

If you pick a goat door initially (2/3 chance of picking a goat door), switching always forces you to pick the car door, because the host HAS to open the other goat door.

The only way switching makes you lose is if you initially picked the car door (1/3 chance)

Wasting money on hybrid cars and wind farms instead of rocket ships.

Dont worry just show up. They realize youre all morons.

Three doors. Door G1 (goat1), G2 (goat2), and C (car)

You pick door G1:
He opens door G2
You switch to door C
Result, win.

You pick door G2:
He opens door G1
You switch to door C
Result, win

You pick door C
He opens either door g1 or g2
you switch to the other goat door
Result, lose.

Now lets do you not switching:

You pick door G1:
He opens door G2
You do not switch.
Result, lose.

You pick door G2:
He opens door G1
You do not switch
Result, lose

You pick door C
He opens either door g1 or g2
do not switch
Result, win.

If you switch you have a 2 in 3 chance of winning, if you do not switch you have a 1 in 3 chance of winning.

magnetos

how to know if quantum trains are running on time?

>>1017802
no its ok they have heisenberg compensators ~_^

transporters dont teleport you they vaporize you, read the data, send the data, and you get reassembled like they replicate food.

Basically every time you step into a transporter you die, and another you is created.

>>1017771
yes there is its called schamayim

Im able to self brainwash myself into believing whatever i want to believe.

You cant really judge someone unless you've walked in their shoes after all.

scientists don't know engineering notation

>>1017724
>there is only one real mathematical operation

wait, i thought this was already accepted?

it is proper grammar, proper internet grammar. you probably miss the subtle inflections.

You see, since all communication is done via text, a way to communicate more fully meaning was required. emoticons are part of this, but the way you type the words also matters.

>>1017609
actually, mark twain's autobiography is finally being published this year (100 years after his death as per his instructions)

I wonder if it will talk about tesla at all.