[extropy-chat] monty hall paradox again

[Brett Paatsch]

Spike wrote: 

> > Could it really be that you don't realise?  Could it be that you
> > do realise and some others don't and that you enjoy that? 
> 
> Oh I enjoy it, but no I do not realize.  Read on.

I am glad you enjoy yourself Spike. Your enjoyment is infectious.
 
> > 
> > > For that reason, there really is no reason  to bother opening 
> > > and looking in the envelope you chose first.  
> > 
> > Re-read what you wrote when you first outlined the hypothetical
> > at the top.  It is only AFTER an envelope is chosen and opened
> > revealing that it contains 10 dollars that the messenger offers a 
> > second trade. The messenger did not say from the outset that
> > whatever the first envelope contained the contents could be
> > exchanged after being determining for the contents of the other
> > envelope prior to their being determined. If that whats you
> > wanted the messenger to say thats a different hypothetical. 
> > 
> > How long has this list been discussing a twisted hypothetical? 
>Brett  Paatsch
> 
> You may be onto something Brett.   #1  What difference does it
> make if the messenger tells you up front that after making a
> choice, you will be given the option of trading?  #2  The
> paradox doesn't seem to disappear if it is carefully
> explained up front, but do suggest a modification of
> the scenario if you can fix it. #3

#1 Or maybe not. I'm confident you changed your hypothetical a bit
in the first post and that that affected my approach to the problem.

I wasn't sure you had a single problem in mind rather than a cluster
of similar problems that somewhat paradoxically, you were trying to
work into a usable (and fun) paradox.    

#2 Haven't worked that out logically yet. I can. But deliberately 
haven't. Intuitively, when I last posted I saw that it might matter. I 
could have been wrong.  I'd started breaking it out mentally into
events and times and dependencies. I was comparing two scenarios.
One where the messenger offered the trade after the choice and the
other where the messenger advised that a trade would be offered
after the first envelopes contents were determined. Even played
with a combo of the two (probably irrational). You apparently
think that (two cases) doesn't matter mathematically.  Bizarrely
(at this stage) to be honest, (to give insight into thinking) I haven't 
done it mathematically, so what I think you think - I haven't yet
checked :-) 

My feeling was (without meaning to be impolite) if you couldn't
specify a clean hypothetical why should I spend time on trying to
resolve likely or potentially resultant paradoxes. 

#3 Fix it? Do you want the paradox preserved ('coz paradoxes
are fun and then you can use it to test something else) or do you
want it solved? Not promising I can do either, but I know I can't
do both at once.  *Suspect* I could do either. Paradox there
too. But merely apparently. 

Hmm. Stream of consciousness over :-) Stand back for red face
or insight. 

Cheers,
Brett
(not drunk or drugged :-)