Re: An Easy, Logical Solution to the Monty Hall Problem

J Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> writes:

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
J Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> writes:

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
J Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> writes:

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
J Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> writes:

But I'm not beyond working out that my chance of picking a
winner from two options, one of which ALWAYS has the prize, is
ALWAYS 50/50. Simplicity itself.
One of which ALWAYS has the prize? I'd pick that one.

But then it seems you know that the prospect of picking the right
door from a choice of two doors, one of which has the prize, is
always 50/50. How can you disagree with that?
I'm simply not as clever as you, so I'm afraid that I'm duped into
believing what I see. And what I see is that 2/3 of the time,
switching wins.

Well, I also understand the probability theory well enough that I'm
convinced the odds of winning when switching is 2/3, even without the
simulations. I do wish I wasn't so stupid, but I am.

I also said always 'has' the prize, not 'is' the prize, so if petty
repartee is your aim then you WILL come off worse.
No doubt. Heck, I'm so damned stupid that I don't even understand
your emphasis on has/is.
The Monty Hall game is no more than this simple scenario: You
always end up with a choice of one of two doors behind one of which
is the winner. That's the whole game.
T'ain't.
The whole game is this.
One door out of three has the prize. You pick a door. Monty
randomly
opens a door satisfying the following two conditions:
(1) It is not the door you picked.
(2) It is not the door with the prize.
You may now choose either to open the door you originally picked or
open the other unopened door.
A logical analysis: You always end up with two doors. You always
have a winner behind one of the doors. You always have a 50/50
chance of picking the winner. That's the logic of it.

A psychological analysis: The only possibility of there being more
or less than a 50/50 winning choice comes from psychological
pressure from Monty, who knows where the winning door is. THAT is
why he starts with three doors - he has the verbal dexterity to
trick you into picking the loser.
Psychological pressures explain the computer simulations? Weird.

I would like to say that the computer simulations are fucked to
buggery: they describe not Monty's game but are rather attempts to
promote the wilfull pleasures that arise from personal estrangement
from the world and its affairs.

It is you who by abstaining from betting here are estranging yourself from
the affairs of the world.

Get down the pub and try it out ....

--
Alan Smaill
.

Quantcast