Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
Zedd's dead.
“In the long run we are all dead.” - John Maynard Keynes ("Keynes wrote this in one of his earlier works, The Tract on Monetary Reform, in 1923. It should be clear that he is not arguing that we should recklessly enjoy the present and let the future go hang. He is exasperated with the view of mainstream economists that the economy is an equilibrium system which will eventually return to a point of balance, so long as the government doesn’t interfere and if we are only willing to wait. He later challenged that view in his most important work The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (1935). arguing that the economy can slip into a long term underemployment equilibrium from which only government policy can rescue it.")

That everything must even out - and electric charge certainly appears to, though it's not at all understood yet how this might apply to anti-charge - and hence is still quite ambiguous in terms of a theory of everything to date, doesn't mean that what we do know is ambiguous per se. As much as the newer models of the universe take hold, what has been properly established shall remain somewhere in "the tapestry".

We know a lot about the "two-envelope paradox". No definitive explanation yet. There are two legs to that paradox as well, which together give rise to the other intuitive way to calculate the expected value. Obviously, the other calculation is wrong. And, the more you learn about formal logic, the more perplexing the rationale behind this seems.

In which universe, or part of this one, might the other calculation for the "two-envelope paradox" be the correct answer? As far as the "dice problem" goes, its two legs can as easily come together in the 1/11 chance answer in the same way as "two-envelope paradox's". You'll have to think about the way the "two-envelope paradox" comes together to form the other, different calculation of expected value. This is the real paradoxical part of it, where the other calculation begins to make sense. Note that the "two-envelope paradox" involves multiplication; and this one, addition.