Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sorry.


Oh and by the way, on the other question, apparently it's the egg (I love the LONDON, England bit) http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/


LONDON, England -- It's a question that has baffled scientists, academics, pub bores and contributors to the East Dulwich Forum in East Dulwich, LONDON, England (OK I added that bit) through the ages: What came first, the chicken or the egg?


Now a team made up of a geneticist, philosopher and chicken farmer claim to have found an answer. It was the egg.


Put simply, the reason is down to the fact that genetic material does not change during an animal's life.


Therefore the first bird that evolved into what we would call a chicken, probably in prehistoric times, must have first existed as an embryo inside an egg.


So what is the meaning of life..... anyone?

Four (Peckham Rye-related) questions here. I'm going No, No, Maybe, Unlikely.


And did those feet in ancient time

walk upon England?s mountains green?

And was the holy Lamb of God

on England?s pleasant pastures seen?

And did the countenance divine

shine forth upon our clouded hills?

And was Jerusalem builded here

among these dark Satanic Mills?

Several years ago, I sat perplexed and silent and thinking in a pub after a so-called friend layed 'The Monty Hall Question' on me.


So, for anyone who wants to sit perplexed silent and thinking for a while, is desperately trying to not do any work and who hasn't heard it before, here it is:


Monty Hall, quiz show host, offers his contestant a choice of three doors, behind each of which a prize is hidden. Behind one door is a sports car, behind the other two, booby prizes.

The contestant selects a door, which remains closed.

Monty then opens one of the remaining doors, behind which he knows there is a booby prize.

The contestant is then give the choice of either sticking to his first choice, or switching.


Should he switch, or stick?

If you are the kind of person who entertains themselves by putting cats in boxes the car exists behind both doors and is also not behind both doors until you open one of them.


All possibilities are real and coexist until it is determined which one we experience.

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Several years ago, I sat perplexed and silent and

> thinking in a pub after a so-called friend layed

> 'The Monty Hall Question' on me.

>

> So, for anyone who wants to sit perplexed silent

> and thinking for a while, is desperately trying to

> not do any work and who hasn't heard it before,

> here it is:

>

> Monty Hall, quiz show host, offers his contestant

> a choice of three doors, behind each of which a

> prize is hidden. Behind one door is a sports car,

> behind the other two, booby prizes.

> The contestant selects a door, which remains

> closed.

> Monty then opens one of the remaining doors,

> behind which he knows there is a booby prize.

> The contestant is then give the choice of either

> sticking to his first choice, or switching.

>

> Should he switch, or stick?


Good question: sorry to be an anorak, but I have to bring this down to the mathematics of probability.


Statistically, answer should be switch - the original probability of getting the right door was 1/3. now that a booby trap has been eliminated, the odds of the other door being the prize are, technically, 1 - 1/3 = 2/3, not 1/2 and 1/2. So switch.

_______________________________


Donald Duck never wears trousers. but always wraps a towel round his waist after bathing - why?

Re: Monty Hall, you definitely switch.


Think of it this way - if you stick, you have 1 door. If you switch, you have 2 doors. There is 1/3 chance the car is behind each door, so by switching you have 2/3. The fact that one of the 2 has a booby prize doesn't change anything.

The key is that the two choices you are given at each stage are not random events - the probability is affected by the fact that the host knows where the booby prizes are and knowingly removes one.


You have a 2/3 chance of choosing the booby prize in the first place and, if you do, switching guarantees you will win the car because the other booby prize has been removed. If you stick you keep your original 1/3 chance - switching doubles your chances of winning to 2/3.

i request more questions like "Donald Duck never wears trousers. but always wraps a towel round his waist after bathing - why?"

and less well known, mathematically and logically solvable problems like the three doors probability pooper..


what have you always wanted to know but were afraid to ask?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I might be able to help - text me and I will send you some details 07972 368 261
    • Yeah but I suppose the issue is that Brexit/Truss moment destabilised our economy and Trump's Truss moment is destabilising every economy globally and rocking the very foundation of global trading. Our stupid moments were just our stupid moments - Trump's stupid moment is everyone's stupid moment. The fact that people have been getting out of gold as well as stocks speaks volumes - gold is normally the safe-haven investors head for but lots are just cashing out completely.
    • Imagine a country voting for something that has a major financial hit to a country and having an electorate and different governments too proud/embarrased/dumb to reverse said decision After 9 years America and Trump might be on a different scale but England could do with a bit of reflection before judging other countries (at a national level.  I know lots of you sane, wise posters are not culpable) 
    • The real worry is that Trump will never admit he got anything wrong and, as he did today with more threats to China, will keep doubling-down. Those tactics might work in real estate in the US but this is not real estate. I do wonder whether other governments will be forced to absorb the short-term pain in the view that they need to let him crash things to such a point that Americans go...what are you doing. Although he seems to be trying to mitigate dissent within his own party by turning on them quickly - like all good dictators do. It just seems ludicrous to think this puts the US in a stronger short-term position - I saw analysis that a Boeing 787 bill of materials now costs $20m more with the tariffs due to them only being assembled in the US and the parts manufactured all over the world. Just who is this supposed to be benefiting.  American 401ks are linked to the stock market so American pensions are going downhill fast.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...