18 Jun 07
1 edit
Originally posted by doodinthemoodSo, is there a debate or not? You seem to be contradicting yourself.
Nevertheless, I feel that my proposal, while not definitely confirming a 100% stick, should at least signify that the puzzle needs more debate
Read my last post. This idea has already been covered. It is not the subject of any debate.
18 Jun 07
I'm not contradicting myself.
If the presenter always opens a door, then it is 66% switch. This is not open to debate, it is mathematically provable, and anyone who repeats the proof for it adds nothing to the discussion.
There is a debate about whether or not it is reasonable to suggest that the presenter does not always open a door.
18 Jun 07
Originally posted by doodinthemoodThanks for the clarification. To suggest that the host may or may not open another door is just silly. It changes the rules of the game. If he does open a losing door, then you switch...we all agree on that. If he instead opens no door, then you are left with either keeping your original choice (1/3 success), or switching to either of the two other doors (each with a 1/3 success rate). That proposal just doesn't make sense.
I'm not contradicting myself.
If the presenter always opens a door, then it is 66% switch. This is not open to debate, it is mathematically provable, and anyone who repeats the proof for it adds nothing to the discussion.
There is a debate about whether or not it is reasonable to suggest that the presenter does not always open a door.