/sci/ - Science & Math

>Plays monty hall
>Curses the first pick A, B or C
>Sees no problem

The monty hall problem is the best midwit filter.
I have never seen a person of subpar intelligence be able to comprehend why the Monty hall problem is true. No matter how much you explain it to them, they won't get it. This problem should be used as an offhand IQ test for schools and jobs.

>Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

Do you get it? or is it over for you?

I rephrased Monty Hall in quantum mechanics and received a different result.

The doors are 3 qubits with states |G> for goat and |C> for car. The states are entangled such that only one door is a car.

|psi> = sqrt(1/3) |C>|G>|G> + sqrt(1/3) |G>|C>|G> + sqrt(1/3) |G>|G>|C>

You choose door 2, the host opens door 1 and measures a car. The state collapses to

sqrt(1/3) |G>|C>|G> + sqrt(1/3) |G>|G>|C>

After normalization this is

sqrt(1/2) |G>|C>|G> + sqrt(1/2) |G>|G>|C>

A contradiction to the classical result which would be

sqrt(1/3) |G>|C>|G> + sqrt(2/3) |G>|G>|C>

Where am I wrong??

>axiom of choice
>spooky action at a distance
>Monty Hall
>halting problem
>undefinable numbers
>Wigner's friend
>consciousness causes collapse
>Gödel's incompleteness theorems
>delayed choice quantum eraser
If you fully understand these then you're ready to tackle the question of free will.

My wife saw a tiktok about the Monty Hall paradox and she didn't understand it. So I explained the usual "Imagine it with 100 doors and the moderator opens 98 of them" story. She still didn't get it and said "What if I was right with my first choice?" I then showed her the table with all possible outcomes on Wikipedia, but that's too many numbers for her.

Do you guys have a better and more intuitive explanation even a very unintelligent person will understand?

Hello Friends.

My girlfriend, I and a mutual friend from university started this new youtubechannel in order to promote science related content.

Basically, it's cute drawings of animals and maths - everyones favorite two things. If that sounds like something that might interest you, check us out at www.youtube.com/@science_gang

Topics that will be covered in very near future are: Logic, Numerical Mathematics (especially partial differential equations and integration), different "paradoxes" (such as the birthday paradox or the monty hall problem).

One of our team is also a theoretical quantum physicist, so there will definitely be a videoseries about quantum physics.

In order to make this a little more interesting: Which not very well known science related content creators do you like?

the monty hall program is nonsense
if you eliminate one of the doors, and one of the goats, at that point you're left with one goat, one car, and two doors. that means that both doors have a 1 in 2 chance of having the goat and a 1 in 2 chance of having the car, and the choice to swap to the other door has the same probability of getting either as the choice to stay at the same door.
i don't understand why people pretend as though the 1 in 3 chance from when you first make your choice somehow carries over once one of the doors is revealed to be a goat. the second choice is not the same as the first choice, it's an entirely new choice between two doors, one which contains a goat and the other which contains a car, and there's no reason why one door should have a higher chance than the other of having the car
pic rel summarizes everything that is wrong with how people approach the problem. they assume, for no real reason, that the 2/3 chance of being wrong at the beginning somehow translates over to your second choice, whether or not to switch which door you chose, despite the fact that the second choice only involves two doors and four possible outcomes, rather than the three doors and nine possible outcomes from the first choice

Most people in 2022 believe you increase your chances of winning if you decide to switch in the Monty Hall problem

They believe you get an additional 33% of winning if you switch

Is this idiocracy?

I don't get it. Hundreds of threads of people discussing rather mundane garbage like the Monty Hall problem, IQ tests, some Chinese school problem, random political discussion about the state of science ("soience"), literal pop-sci garbage, and NOBODY here studies anything.
Even the math general is slow as shit these days which just shows how lazy people here seem to be.
I just don't get it, what the fuck is the point of this all? Did these people get abused in their childhood or what? What is the reason for such laziness?

>inb4 why not make some high quality threads yourself
I did, retard. Dozens, in fact. All of them went straight to page 10 before any constructive discussion even began to take place. I simply won't accept having to continuously bump my own threads on a slow board like /sci/. This is a moderation problem.

>has the highest IQ in the worl
>BTFO men with their tiny little IQs by solving the Monty Hall problem in 1990 and making it mainstream

men BTFO again. women won, chuds

Monty hall is cringe and retarded
Change my mind

Just as I finally wrap my head around the Monty Hall problem, I find a worse one:
A shopkeeper says she has two new baby beagles to show you, but she doesn’t know whether they’re male, female, or a pair. You tell her that you want only a male,and she telephones the fellow who’s giving them a bath. ”Is at least one a male?” she asks him. ”Yes!” she informs you with a smile. What is the probability that the other one is a male?

Question from /b/. But, my question is... Does the Monty Hall Theory apply to this problem. Explain.

The Monty Hall Problem giving you a 66% chance to win is retarded. There are two doors left, so it's 50/50, not 2/3.

Does the monty hall problem work with guessing who the impostor is in among us?

Can we apply the wave function formalism of Schrodinger's cat to the Monty Hall problem? Maybe that would yield new insights into the paradox.

After all, the quantum mechanical formalism is another way to describe how probability distributions change upon gaining new information.

The Monty Hall problem isn't real, its just a fake factoid like eating 5 spiders a year while you sleep or humans only using 10% of their brain. It just got memed into being considered true even by professional statisticians though it is obviously false. The myth became so widespread it made its way into mathematics textbooks and became mainstream in the academic community. Its the greatest mathematical hoax there's ever been.

Its obviously false though, you cannot alter the odds of one thing being behind one door by opening another door.

If you don't believe that evolution is real then you are literally 0 IQ. Evolution is not only evident but it's very intuitive and easy to understand. Speciation is real as well, species can transform into different species but it may not be as easily-comprehended because it takes a very long time. Do you have any idea how long the Earth has bore life? It is obvious that speciation occurs. I strongly support science but I have a few problems with the school system, and my only suggestions are that it could be better. I believe that colleges currently have too many useless courses and schools in general discuss too many topics that are worthless to the students learning them. My hat is off to every scientist and mathematician and their works, although I do believe hard work is necessary to progress, I think that being "smart" in one's field is simply a genetic trait and therefore one should not feel to proud about being smart rather they should feel it is their duty to do what they are capable of on their own scale and not feel like they are better than everybody else. I think that people who are genetically less capable of certain fields, should do what they are best at, for example, I am not too good at math which frustrates me a lot but I realize it is just because my genes built my brain in a way less capable of understanding the concepts so I don't feel too bad and instead I contribute in other ways. Also my interpretation of the monty hall problem is that switching is always right, but I'd admit maybe you interpreted the problem differently, but in my interpretation it is not 50-50.

For all the high-schoolers out there. Here is the probability problem. Enough of the dunning kruger saying its 2/3 using incorrect arguments such as monty hall. Half of you didnt even read the question properly. Its 1/2

No matter how I look at it, the answer I get is 50%. Yet so many people say it's 2/3rd. Am I wrong? This isn't like the Monty hall problem, it's pure chance wether you have the box with two gold balls or the box with one gold one silver ball right?

I don't understand the Monty Hall problem

Can someone explain this Monty Hall bullshit to me?

Why in the fuck is "staying with the door you've chosen" not interpreted as "choosing one of the two remaining doors"?

Would this riddle change completely if Monty didn't just open a door to reveal a goat, but also explicitly revoked your initial choice so that you're back in a 'neutral' position?

Does it all hinge on pedantic semantics?

Monty Hall brainlets BTFO, goat is the GOAT choice.

Has not one but FOUR legs
Has TWO horns
You can hug it
You can get milk from it
You can eat it
You could use it as a means of transportation

Guys I'm frustrated and confused. In the monty hall problem, if the host doesn't open any door after I pick one, will the probably of winning still be 2/3 if I switch? or it's 1/3? it's 1/3 right?