Only people with an IQ of 115 or higher can get this right

[Ryland]

50% since you know you are either in the box that had 2 gold balls or the one that had one of each. Thus there is equal chance that the remaining ball is gold.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Obviously the question is worded wrong because it doesn't indicate what box you're in and for it to be 2/3 you'd then have to be in a 2nd box which isn't implied.

Therefore there are 2 acceptable answers

That is incorrect.

That's why they call it a probability question.

 

[paperfist]

That is incorrect.

That's why they call it a probability question.

It says which box you're in?

lol box, balls...

 

[Humpy]

That is incorrect.

That's why they call it a probability question.

Who is they? Mayne is the only one who can make that call and he is balls deep in a broken AC unit, and/or drunk as fuck right now.

 

[local]

Ok, after reading 250 some odd posts and rereading the original question several times I can see where the 2/3 chance is coming from... I am going to change my answer. 2/3

 

[Darwin333]

Who is they? Mayne is the only one who can make that call and he is balls deep in a broken AC unit, and/or drunk as fuck right now.

Are any ATOTer's missing? If so they could have taken him up on his "getting out of rear choke challenge" and he is currently balls deep in him.

 

[Mayne]

you guys are terrible at reading comprehension and statistics.

 

[Hitman928]

Obviously the question is worded wrong because it doesn't indicate what box you're in and for it to be 2/3 you'd then have to be in a 2nd box which isn't implied.

Therefore there are 2 acceptable answers

50% since you know you are either in the box that had 2 gold balls or the one that had one of each. Thus there is equal chance that the remaining ball is gold.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGMc8B60ZpU - Has an explanation with visuals.
https://github.com/yourfriendaaron/box-paradox - simulation that auto runs or that you can play to demonstrate how the probability works out. Note, must have python installed.

 

[Hitman928]

you guys are terrible at reading comprehension and statistics.

 

[brianmanahan]

you guys are terrible at reading comprehension and statistics.

now you're just begging to be banned

what's the probability that the answer is %66.667?

 

[Mayne]

now you're just begging to be banned

Not gonna lie. I need a good banning ..need to paint my whole apartment before my older stister moves in this saturday...i'm stressed the fuck out.

 

[Mayne]

you have never dealt with a 52 year old woman that is scottish and has giant fake books. ..and she is 6'2"

 

[Mayne]

i'm under the gun bigtime.

 

[IronWing]

you have never dealt with a 52 year old woman that is scottish and has giant fake books. ..and she is 6'2"

Empty shelf?

 

[Mayne]

I'm going to work tomorrow and spend the rest of the week getting this apartmnet in order before she shows up..so tired right now...but I don't have animals living with me anymore

 

[Mayne]

the best part is guys, you have never met my older sister. It's a whole new game from me.

 

[Mayne]

atleast 2-3 years of threads.

 

[IronWing]

the best part is guys, you have never met my older sister. It's a whole new game from me.

Post pics, we might have.

 

[Mayne]

the best is her son will be sleeping in my bedroom. it never ends at my place.

 

[Mayne]

threads for years. or i'm dead. probably dead.

 

[mindless1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGMc8B60ZpU - Has an explanation with visuals.

It's not that we don't understand how they came to the 2/3 conclusion, rather it's that Bertrand's, and your, logic is wrong. It's that you, and Bertrand, don't understand how to apply statistics to this problem, in the context of how it is posed in the question.

Once the stipulation is made that the first coin is gold, there are only two boxes to consider, but also only two coin colors. Because it was worded that way, there is no 3 in the calculation.

Look at the video at 1:57 where it was stated "there are 3 possible outcomes". This is in error. The first coin could have been either G1 or G2, that does not matter because it was only established that a gold coin was chosen, not a specific gold coin. Next probability was stated as choosing a 2nd gold coin, but again not a specific gold coin, so the choices G1 and G2 in the video are the same outcome because they are both gold coins.

The only valid answer is 50% (1/2) because G1 and G2 cannot be distinguised as different choices based only on the parameter of choosing a gold coin. There is no way to differentiate G1 and G2. The variable of gold is equal for both, so G1=G2, or they are both G1 and there is no G2 if you prefer to state it that way. G1/G2 and G2/G1 are both the same choice, cannot be enumerated separately.

 

[Hitman928]

It's not that we don't understand how they came to the 2/3 conclusion, rather it's that Bertrand's, and your, logic is wrong. It's that you, and Bertrand, don't understand how to apply statistics to this problem, in the context of how it is posed in the question.

Once the stipulation is made that the first coin is gold, there are only two boxes to consider, but also only two coin colors. Because it was worded that way, there is no 3 in the calculation.

Look at the video at 1:57 where it was stated "there are 3 possible outcomes". This is in error. The first coin could have been either G1 or G2, that does not matter because it was only established that a gold coin was chosen, not a specific gold coin. Next probability was stated as choosing a 2nd gold coin, but again not a specific gold coin, so the choices G1 and G2 in the video are the same outcome because they are both gold coins.

The only valid answer is 50% (1/2) because G1 and G2 cannot be distinguised as different choices based only on the parameter of choosing a gold coin. There is no way to differentiate G1 and G2. The variable of gold is equal for both, so G1=G2, or they are both G1 and there is no G2 if you prefer to state it that way. G1/G2 and G2/G1 are both the same choice, cannot be enumerated separately.

If this were true, why do experimental results prove out the probability of 2/3 and not 50%?

 

[mindless1]

If this were true, why do experimental results prove out the probability of 2/3 and not 50%?

Care to elaborate? It's not necessary to disprove something that is already logically impossible and in error. An infinite # of reasons why something is wrong is not needed, only ONE reason.

It is simple fact that the only variable was gold vs silver, and thus G1 must equal G2 until another variable is introduced, something like heads up or down, different denomination, etc.

 

[Hitman928]

Care to elaborate? It's not necessary to disprove something that is already logically impossible and in error. An infinite # of reasons why something is wrong is not needed, only ONE reason.

It is simple fact that the only variable was gold vs silver, and thus G1 must equal G2 until another variable is introduced, something like heads up or down, different denomination, etc.

Or, your reasoning is wrong so your disproof is invalid.

If you actually try the situation yourself, just as described in the problem, 2/3 of the time the second ball will be gold and 1/3 of the time the second ball will be silver. If it were a 50% chance, the second ball you pull should be silver half the time and gold half the time. If the real life (perfectly repeatable) result of experimentation doesn't match your logical conclusion but matches someone else's, yours is the one that is incorrect.

 

[Humpy]

you guys are terrible at reading comprehension and statistics.

Just so everyone understands the Mayneism, being terrible at reading comprehension and statistics is a good thing.