[extropy-chat] Re: monty hall paradox again: reds and green gorfs

[Spike]

> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
> 
> Ah, we thus find the obviously erroneous assumption at the 
> heart of the paradox:  You suppose that I have made a mistake.
> I didn't say to stick, Spike.  I said to keep the envelope if 
> the amount of money in the envelope was surprisingly high, and
otherwise 
> swap.  As for this business of zorgs, I would still be surprised to
find 10^100 
> zorgs in the envelope, so there must be a limit somewhere.
> 
> -- 
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky

I may have misunderstood.  My notion is that the
term zorg can mean anything.  The term google,
before about 2001 meant 10^100.  So a googleth
is 10^(-100), so 10^100 googleths is 1.  A googleplex 
was once equal to google^2, so even 10^200 googleplexeths 
still wont buy you a good cup of java.  A zorg could 
be a picogoogleplexeth of a cent.  My understanding
is that you argued for swapping unless there was an
absurdly large number of zorgs.  But this reasoning
breaks down if one really knows not what a zorg
might be.  The only information you get from opening
your envelope is to determine if you ultimately 
doubled your money or lost half.

Your line of reasoning works if the envelope contains
a familiar currency such as dollars.  Even if someone 
gives you a million bucks, they are unlikely to give you 
two million.  I agree.

Unfortunately this example is causing people to get
tripped by the details of the problem, as happened
with the red and green gorf paradox.  Do suggest a
fix if you know one in both cases.  I want to express
the notion that swapping is the intuitively correct
path, yet leads to paradox: swapping is still the
best strategy even after swapping.  We know this
cannot be right, so the first envelope you choose
must (somehow) have a higher chance of being the
larger amount.  How, oh evolution, how can this be so?

spike