Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New and final solution of the Monty Hall Dilemma

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 09:31:25 09/27/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 27, 2002 at 12:27:38, Peter Berger wrote:

>On September 27, 2002 at 12:18:17, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:36:44, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>>
>>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:15:27, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:09:41, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:02:59, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 10:32:18, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 10:18:19, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 10:04:42, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On September 27, 2002 at 09:45:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I discuss this situation:
>>>>>>>>>- The candidate chooses door 1
>>>>>>>>>- The host chooses (say) door 3, and is lucky, there is a goat in door 3
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>So there _is_ a game!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Now the candidate should switch and double its winning chances.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Do you agree?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>No
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>If you don't agree: Consider the game with 1.000.000 doors, the candidate
>>>>>>>>>chooses door 1. The host opens 999.998 doors, without knowing where the car is.
>>>>>>>>>By incredible luck all those doors have goats behind them. There is now door 1
>>>>>>>>>and door 432.102 closed. So again there is a game! Do you agree that the
>>>>>>>>>candidate should switch?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>No
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>in 100000 cases you are going to have 999998 cases when there
>>>>>>>>is no game
>>>>>>>>1 case when there is a game when it is a good idea to switch and
>>>>>>>>1 case when there is a game when it is a bad idea to switch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I discuss only the situation when there is a game. The two cases when there is a
>>>>>>>game are _NOT_ equally likely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>When the game starts:
>>>>>>>The car is with 999999/1000000 probability behind one of the doors 2..1000000.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you agree?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Now 999998 doors are opened, the 999999/1000000 probability is still correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Before I see the result of opening the doors I agree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The car is with 1/1000000 behind door 1 and with 999999/1000000 behind door
>>>>>>>432.102
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you agree?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Why not? The car is not moving. It is not more likely that it is behind door 1
>>>>>than before the doors were opened.
>>>>
>>>>The car is not moving but my knowledge is changed.
>>>>The fact that there is a game changes the probability.
>>>>
>>>>Let play 100000 games when the car is behind door i in game i.
>>>>
>>>>Wehn the car is behind door 1 you lose by switching.
>>>>When the car is behind door 432102 you win by switching
>>>>In other cases there is no game.
>>>
>>>>The number of wins equal to the number of losses and it mean that the
>>>>probability is 1/2.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>I disagree, why should the odds for door 1 change when door 999999 is opened?
>>>
>>>Gerrit
>>
>>What do you disagree about?
>>
>>Suppose we play 1000000 games when I always choose door 1
>>and the host always open the other doors except door 432102.
>>
>>Suppose that the car is in door i in game i.
>>Do you agree that 999998 games are canceled?
>>
>>Do you agree that in the games that are not canceled you
>>can win 1 of 2 if you do not switch?
>>
>>Do you agree that it means that the probability to win is 1/2 after you
>>know that the game is not canceled?
>>
>>I did not understand the second reply of Rolf so I did not answer
>>about it.
>>
>>Uri
>
>The better assumption is to say that the car is in j where j is anthing between
>2 and 999999. Now the unlikely thing happened: the not-knowing Monty managed to
>take away all other no-car-doors.
>
>The probability for your initial choice to be right isn't 1/2 at all. Because
>the door that survived the Monty-opening-procedure still represents its 999998
>brothers perfectly well.
>
>Write a little simulation and you'll see you are wrong. In fact Bruce Moreland
>even posted some code in CTF already.
>
>Peter

Yes, writing code is easy, as someone said, but answering if the code could be
applied seems to a bit more difficult...

Have you read my post with the candidate going to the toilette in between?

Rolf Tueschen



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.