It was two years ago today...

[RS__]

Honestly, I think the "if people are drawn to many different conclusions, the wording is bad" argument is a bit silly.

Many people would get the monty hall problem wrong.


Of course it's a "gotcha" question. Monty hall is the same way. But it's not due to the wording. It's due to the fact the answer is different than what you'd likely think it is.

Same thing with the "what's more likely, rolling a both a 6 and an 8 or rolling two 7's first?" Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy loses.

Same with many riddles.

[arcimede$]

Honestly, I think the "if people are drawn to many different conclusions, the wording is bad" argument is a bit silly.

Many people would get the monty hall problem wrong.


Of course it's a "gotcha" question. Monty hall is the same way. But it's not due to the wording. It's due to the fact the answer is different than what you'd likely think it is.

Same thing with the "what's more likely, rolling a both a 6 and an 8 or rolling two 7's first?" Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy loses.

Same with many riddles.

Exactly. It is a trick question and most people will get it wrong. However, the words were clearly chosen carefully so that people with good logical skills will come to the right answer. It's perfectly OK to get it wrong. It is not perfectly OK to deny the correct answer once the details of the problem are explained. Those still pushing the 1:6 answer are showing the effects of a closed mind and/or massive ego.

[jbjb]

Honestly, I think the "if people are drawn to many different conclusions, the wording is bad" argument is a bit silly.

Many people would get the monty hall problem wrong.


Of course it's a "gotcha" question. Monty hall is the same way. But it's not due to the wording. It's due to the fact the answer is different than what you'd likely think it is.

Same thing with the "what's more likely, rolling a both a 6 and an 8 or rolling two 7's first?" Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy loses.

Same with many riddles.

I gave a perfect example to this puzzle using people instead of dice. The answer is the same.

P.S. Singer believes the Monty Hall problem is 50/50. Look on Alan's Best Buys site for his article.

[quahaug]

Honestly, I think the "if people are drawn to many different conclusions, the wording is bad" argument is a bit silly.

Many people would get the monty hall problem wrong.


Of course it's a "gotcha" question. Monty hall is the same way. But it's not due to the wording. It's due to the fact the answer is different than what you'd likely think it is.

Same thing with the "what's more likely, rolling a both a 6 and an 8 or rolling two 7's first?" Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy loses.

Same with many riddles.

Exactly. It is a trick question and most people will get it wrong. However, the words were clearly chosen carefully so that people with good logical skills will come to the right answer. It's perfectly OK to get it wrong. It is not perfectly OK to deny the correct answer once the details of the problem are explained. Those still pushing the 1:6 answer are showing the effects of a closed mind and/or massive ego.

+100

[mickeycrimm]

All I will contribute is this. Looking at the dice under the cup is, in reality, a sequential act. An actual human being's eyes process one die before the other by darting from area to area. One die will be processed before the other. This makes it a sequential act. An actual person is not, technically and actually speaking, drawing the conclusion about what is on which die simultaneously. It is sequential. Therefore, when a person sees a 2 under the first die, he has very possibly not yet processed the second die. If he immediately reports that he has seen a 2, that does not necessarily mean he has seen the second die. If he processes the first die and it is not a 2, then he processes the second die. Mickey's experiment does not technically fulfill the wordage of the trick question because he is reporting the sighting of the dice as if it's simultaneous, not sequential.

The original scenario/question can be reduced to one simple sentence "if you roll two dice and at least one of them is a two then what is the probability that both dice are 2's." The "friend" looking under the cup is all fluff. It doesn't matter who looks under the cup and it doesn't matter which die you see first, the result of the dice throw is still the same.

[mickeycrimm]

If you do not believe the "spinner analogy" is the closest to the original question, what is your analogy?

Neither dice is spinning when I look under the cup.

[mickeycrimm]

Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy losees.

This was a hustle I seen around the poker tables years ago. The hustler would bet you that either a six, seven or eight, would appear on the flop. There are at least 12,000 combinations out of 20,000 that have a six, seven or eight in them. It's a pure sucker bet but some people fell for it.

[Alan Mendelson]

the words were clearly chosen carefully so that people with good logical skills will come to the right answer.

As I pointed out on the WOV forum two years ago it was obvious it was a trick question when you looked at the "answer" in the spoiler. Did anyone besides me happen to read the "spoiler"?

And then did you happen to see how the original poster on the WOV set up his question in attempt to fool everyone to think the wrong way -- and they did?

But putting that aside, redietz has the whole thing perfectly explained: we are as humans unable to process two dice simultaneously. In theory (which is how the 1/11 answer is developed) you can consider two dice and 12 faces. But in the real world you can't.

We use logic and reason to know that when at least one die is showing a 2, that die cannot show any other number. And in a two dice problem, when at least one die is showing a 2, we know that there will forever be one die showing that 2 and the only variable is the second/other die.

In the real world it doesn't matter which of the two dice is showing a 2 because as humans we logically understand that if there are two dice with one showing a 2 the variable is that second die.

To not accept that human condition you must have a closed mind and/or massive ego.

This is why I asked the Wizard to demonstrate the solution using a cup and two dice, just as I did in my video. The first time he did a video similar to mine (I can't find it any longer on YouTube) he actually took the die showing a 2 and rotated it to show 11 possible faces.

If you think a die showing a 2 can be altered then yes, go with your 1/11 answer. That is your reality.

[RS__]

http://www.alanbestbuys.com/id362.html

Scroll down about 1/3 the way to Monty Hall vs The Wizard vs Rob Singer.


Alan, if something is true in theory, then it's true in reality. If one is claimed to be true and the other false, then either one of those claims is untrue or the premise is different for the two claims. Otherwise, theory would be completely unnecessary and a waste of time. I certainly hope we can all agree it is not.

[Alan Mendelson]

Wow, RS__, for a minute I thought you really had me when I read this:

Alan, if something is true in theory, then it's true in reality.

But then I did a little research. Just a little research. And I just could not find a REAL dice game that allowed you to change the face of a die after the die came to rest.

So... maybe in theory you can change the face of a die after it comes to rest, but in reality you can't change the face of a die that comes to rest. At least, I couldn't find a game that allowed it. Can you tell me a game that allows it? You were a dealer in Vegas... did you ever allow the face of a die to be changed after it came to rest?

Getting back to our original question: It seems you are basing your answer of 1/11 on a fantasy game -- a game that allows you to change the face of a die after it comes to rest.

I came up with the answer of 1/6 on reality -- what everyone knows about every dice game which is you roll the dice and they come to rest on a number.

Gosh, had you told me that shaking two dice in a cup was part of a fantasy game that allowed you to change the faces after the dice came to rest I guess I might have come up with the answer of 1/11 all by myself. But no... I didn't know we were talking about a fantasy game. I thought we were talking about reality.

[RS__]

I never said anything about changing the face of a die after it comes to rest. Smells like a strawman to me.

[Alan Mendelson]

I never said anything about changing the face of a die after it comes to rest. Smells like a strawman to me.

In order to get 1/11 you must rotate the die showing a 2 to show other faces... otherwise the answer is 1/6. Are you telling me this is news to you?

[mickeycrimm]

This is how close-minded my massively egotistical brain was over this two dice problem. When I first read the question it was something I had never thought about before and my initial reaction was "It's a no brainer. It's 1 in 6." But when I seen that some people were saying it was 1 in 11 I thought "What the hell? Those people are saying that the great Mickey Crimm is wrong?" I wasn't about to put up with that bullshit. No doubt about it I was out to prove them wrong. I went to work on the math of the problem so I would be thoroughly correct when I explained to them just how wrong they were. Damn whippersnappers. I'll show them.

But alas! In doing the math of the problem my close-minded and massively egotistical mind came to the realization that....that....that....God forbid.....I was.....was....I hate to admit this.....dammit....I WAS WRONG! Just think of all the pain and humiliation my close-minded and massively egotistical brain suffered through when I discovered that the correct answer is 1 in 11. I still can't believe that I was wrong about something. You talk about a bruised ego. I'll never live down the shame.

In theory 2 + 2 = 4. And in the real world 2 + 2 = 4.

[quahaug]

Honestly, I think the "if people are drawn to many different conclusions, the wording is bad" argument is a bit silly.

Many people would get the monty hall problem wrong.


Of course it's a "gotcha" question. Monty hall is the same way. But it's not due to the wording. It's due to the fact the answer is different than what you'd likely think it is.

Same thing with the "what's more likely, rolling a both a 6 and an 8 or rolling two 7's first?" Or the poker one, I don't remember exactly, something about picking 3 cards, then if any of those 3 cards (ranks, not including suits) shows up on the flop, the other guy loses.

Same with many riddles.

I gave a perfect example to this puzzle using people instead of dice. The answer is the same.

P.S. Singer believes the Monty Hall problem is 50/50. Look on Alan's Best Buys site for his article.

It feels really good when my mind grasps a different concept like the Monty hall problem which I had much more trouble seeing than the dice problem. It's like ah ha I see it now but you have to be willing to think out of the box which not everyone can do.

[Count Room]

This is how close-minded my massively egotistical brain was over this two dice problem. When I first read the question it was something I had never thought about before and my initial reaction was "It's a no brainer. It's 1 in 6." But when I seen that some people were saying it was 1 in 11 I thought "What the hell? Those people are saying that the great Mickey Crimm is wrong?" I wasn't about to put up with that bullshit. No doubt about it I was out to prove them wrong. I went to work on the math of the problem so I would be thoroughly correct when I explained to them just how wrong they were. Damn whippersnappers. I'll show them.

But alas! In doing the math of the problem my close-minded and massively egotistical mind came to the realization that....that....that....God forbid.....I was.....was....I hate to admit this.....dammit....I WAS WRONG! Just think of all the pain and humiliation my close-minded and massively egotistical brain suffered through when I discovered that the correct answer is 1 in 11. I still can't believe that I was wrong about something. You talk about a bruised ego. I'll never live down the shame.

In theory 2 + 2 = 4. And in the real world 2 + 2 = 4.

And if I realize that you are right and I am wrong, my sense of being wrong might start to spread and I will fall into an abyss of wrongness where I will disintegrate and become nothing and die!

[regnis]

Here are 2 dice. One shows a 2. What are the odds the other is a 2?

I don't know--third base





Answer to follow later

[RS__]

I never said anything about changing the face of a die after it comes to rest. Smells like a strawman to me.

In order to get 1/11 you must rotate the die showing a 2 to show other faces... otherwise the answer is 1/6. Are you telling me this is news to you?

You don't need to have dice, let alone rotate them, to figure out the answer. Do you think you need to look through a 52 card deck to figure out proper VP strategy?

[jbjb]

I never said anything about changing the face of a die after it comes to rest. Smells like a strawman to me.

In order to get 1/11 you must rotate the die showing a 2 to show other faces... otherwise the answer is 1/6. Are you telling me this is news to you?

You don't need to have dice, let alone rotate them, to figure out the answer. Do you think you need to look through a 52 card deck to figure out proper VP strategy?

Dumbass doesn't know the difference between a "certain" die and "at least one" die.

Again, I gave a perfect example using people instead of dice in the same scenario. Only an idiot can't see it's 1 in 11.

[regnis]

Name calling and swearing etc. a clear sign of ignorance. Just sayin.

[Alan Mendelson]

Dumbass doesn't know the difference between a "certain" die and "at least one" die.

At least one of the dice is a 2, what are the odds that both are showing a 2? In this example, the answer is still 1/6.