Phillip Hallam-Baker on Nostr: The paradox comes from the presentation of the problem. Consider the case where the ...
The paradox comes from the presentation of the problem.
Consider the case where the contestant is given a choice between selecting one door and two doors so they win if either of their two doors is the winning one. That 'choice' isn't remotely difficult, your chance of winning is clearly 33% for one door 66% for two. No brainer to pick two.
But the construction of the paradox makes it appear that your odds of being correct have risen from 33% to 50% after one of the incorrect doors was eliminated. They didn't, your chance of your original choice winning is still 33%.
Consider the case where the contestant is given a choice between selecting one door and two doors so they win if either of their two doors is the winning one. That 'choice' isn't remotely difficult, your chance of winning is clearly 33% for one door 66% for two. No brainer to pick two.
But the construction of the paradox makes it appear that your odds of being correct have risen from 33% to 50% after one of the incorrect doors was eliminated. They didn't, your chance of your original choice winning is still 33%.