Jump to content
Everywhere

Shed some light...(questions you never knew the answers too)

bean_and_legumes

By bean_and_legumes
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

dc

dc

Posted
Posted

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?

Ted Max

Ted Max

Posted
Posted

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?

*Bob*

*Bob*

Posted
Posted

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?

Brendan

Brendan

Posted
Posted

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.

bignumber5

bignumber5

Posted
Posted

*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?

DaveR

DaveR

Posted
Posted

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.

dc

dc

Posted
Posted

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.

bean_and_legumes

bean_and_legumes

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • exdulwicher
      Cyclist visibility

      By exdulwicher · Posted

      Presumably at the same point the person doesn't feel any sympathy for a female victim of assault cos well, that skirt she was wearing, she doesn't deserve any sympathy. Same with that kid who got mugged cos well what was he doing walking through there at that time of night, doesn't deserve any sympathy. You left a window open, of course you got burgled, you don't deserve any sympathy. Maybe everyone in Gaza being shelled to bits could just have upped and left, they probably don't deserve any sympathy either. It's a horrible phrase and frankly anyone using it - whether it's for a cyclist being knocked off or the more extreme examples I've cited above - really needs a long hard look in the mirror because victim blaming doesn't solve anything, in fact it often marginalises or makes excuses for criminal behaviour.
    • Pugwash
      Mugging on Dunstans Road 12/11/25

      By Pugwash · Posted

      Dunstans Road  comes under Dulwich Hill SNT- you can get their details on the Met Police website . I know that the Police are often patrolling Dawson Hights. Please contact them,
    • Earl Aelfheah
      Cyclist visibility

      By Earl Aelfheah · Posted

      No one is arguing that people should cycle without lights or reflectors. Obviously they should. It is also a legal requirement. But the colour of someone’s clothing? Is it ok to wear navy? What about green? What shade? At what point should we have ‘no reason for sympathy’ if they’re in a collision? I don’t want people to feel like they need special clothes just to walk or cycle. If you have lights and reflectors and you’re on well lit city streets, there is no reason why drivers shouldn’t be able to see you, assuming of course, that they're driving with due care and attention. But yes, if there are lots of people without lights, that should be addressed. I suspect in part, it's the change over in seasons and the fact that people are getting caught out by how early it's getting dark now (obviously no excuse).
    • NiteRyder
      Beige band / silver case Apple Watch SE found on Elsie Road

      By NiteRyder · Posted

      Found it but cannot contact owner as no email or message on it. e*****@icloud.com   please let me know if you’ve recently lost an Apple Watch SE

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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