▲ | bitwize 4 days ago | |||||||
Related to the Monty Hall "paradox". Spoiler: You'll get the car if you switch doors with 2/3 probability. | ||||||||
▲ | JeffJor 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Bertrand's Box Paradox, which I wrote about in my own comment, applies to it. The upshot is that probability is not based on which prize placements _could_ lead the current game state, it is the set of all possible game states. Lets assume that the contestant starts off with door #3. Case 1: The prize is behind door #1, and the host must open door #2. Probability 1/3. Case 2: The prize is behind door #2, and the host must open door #1. Probability 1/3. Case 3: The prize is behind door #3, and the host has a choice. Case 3A: The host opens door #1. Probability Q/3. Case 3B: The host opens door #2. Probability (1-Q)/3. If the host actually opens door #1, the probability that door #2 has the prize is (Case 2)/(Case 2 + Case 3A) = (1/3)/(1/3+Q/3) = 1/(1+Q). If the host actually opens door #2, the probability that door #1 has the prize is (Case 1)/(Case 1 + Case 3B) = (1/3)/(1/3+(1-Q)/3) = 1/(2-Q). My point is that, since you get to see which door is opened, 2/3 is correct only if you assume Q=1/2. We aren't told what Q is, but we must assume it is 1/2 because otherwise the answer is different depending on which door is chosen. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | wpollock 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
This always bugged me. It isn't switching your choice that gives the 2/3 probability, it is exercising a choice once one of the doors has been eliminated. The odds are the same as flipping a fair coin to decide on which of the two doors remaining to pick. Am I wrong? | ||||||||
|