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

    • where I've got to with left politics is very much not defined by labels - when anyone suggests (for example and without judgement) "a reformist socialist government" - my response now is: "like where? Which country is closest to this ideal and what challenges to they face?"
    • I wonder why they didn’t use Fairfield Halls with 10 times the space
    • Was anyone commenting here actually AT the meeting?  I was.  Yes David Peckham; it WAS busy. I'd estimate about 150 people filling the biggest room at Ruskin House, with some standing at the back.  And the bar was quite separate with no queue and sensible prices the twice I used it.  To Insuflo I'd say that my reading of Zarah Sultana's piece in The New Left Review accurately admitted past (Corbyn) mistakes and sought to lay a better path for the future. Jeremy is respected by millions but has not been as shrewd or tough an operator as I hope she turns out to be. Precisely the progressive point she makes despite the fact some will try to cite it as a split.  I agree The Left has been guilty of in-fighting at the cost of political success in the past, particularly given FPTP, but some of us are incurable idealists who don't just give up and snipe from the sidelines. I remember a meeting at Brixton Town Hall in the 80s where a Labour Party member advised someone from one or other of the fringe Left parties to 'get out of your ideological telephone booth'. Very funny and accurate and I never forgot the expression.  Maybe The Labour Party is the expression of liberal-thinkers who suppress their disagreements in the interest of occasionally forming a UK government, but their current incarnation is giving dangerous concessions to violent Zionists and UK fascists. Some of us have not given up hope and seek to learn from the mistakes of the past with respect to the formation of a new Left party.  The speakers listed on the poster were, I thought, intelligent and eloquent. One was determined, for instance, actually to organise people to confront the racists attacking asylum seekers in Epping and elsewhere. Another informed us about TfL seeking to change the rules to allow the expulsion of about 70 tube staff from the UK for visa-renewal reasons and that she and others are taking action to prevent that happening. Practical interventions in the real world when The Right is on the rise, emboldened by Reform and its desperate manifesto.  Another emphasised the crucial importance of ecological awareness in policy-making, although alliances with the Green Party were a matter of debate.  A youthful presence (the majority present were, like me, grey-haired) was the contributions by members of the latest incarnation of the 'Revolutionary Communist Party'. One by one they did what that party does: stand up and say 'yes we support the apparent aims of 'Your Party' but really the only solution is revolution' (they mean Bolshevik/French style).  This met with little applause, I think because most people present know that that is not going to happen here unless things get an awful lot worse. Realistically a reformist Socialist government is the furthest Left the current British population could ever countenance in my opinion.  So yes; if we let in-fighting be caused by groups who really just wish to push their manifestos at leftie forums we won't even be in a position to 'split The Left' in the way Sephiroth suggests.  I have been a union member for 22 years, helped organise a unique strike of Lambeth College Unison workers in 2016, voted twice for Jeremy Corbyn as Labour Party leader, and canvassed for him in 2024 in Islington North. Yes; mostly I've lived under Tory governments and seen the welfare state eroded, but I will always resist cynicism and defeatism.  Last night's meeting reminded me that there are decent people out there willing to try to improve society, rather than accept this Labour government as 'the best we can do'.  Peace and love.   
    • a - you said you were done interacting with me, remember b - " police, judge, jury, prosecution and executioner"  - the not very bright person's response on any public forum when someone point out the idiocy of anything. I haven't prosecuted anyone, executed anyone, or taken part in any trial or jury.    I have judged tho but then so do you and so did the OP - so what? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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