puzzles and riddles

[Kiahdaj]

Yep. Basically, my thought is that it's not really a matter of chance, or statistical probability, anyway. What's in the envelope is in the envelope. Same with the other one.

[jean-luc]

But since I can't know how much is in the other envelope, it doesn't matter how much is in my own. All that matters is that I have no way of knowing, so there's no value in switching. Though it wouldn't hurt my chances to switch either.

 

Yes, but you still haven't shown what is wrong with my switching argument, merely that it is wrong, which I have already stated.

 

To look at this another way:

I've proposed an argument for switching infinitely, you've proposed an argument against it. Both seem to make sense, but one of them must be wrong. So what is wrong with which one? ([not-]hint: your argument is right)

 

To Kiadaj: Ditto above.

[sushi]

Oh wow. I completely forgot about this thread.

 

How about this for what's wrong with an argument for switching indefinitely: if I switch indefinitely, I'll never get any of the money.

[jean-luc]

Here's what I was hoping for: The switching argument makes the false assumption that the amount in the envelope will be the same in both situations. So when you pick an envelope, you get either x or 2x, and then you switch to 2x or x respectively, so that means that on average you will get the same amount, hence there is no benefit.

 

This error was also in your monte carlo simulation. If you go a little more indepth and simulate two envelopes, picking one, and then switching it'll give you the intuitive result.

[Guest]

I'm just going to make up a riddle, it might not be good or make any sense, but you can literally solve it by just reading it:

 

The heavy entrance, also newly scarred with explosive rounds, is stable and conceals really old, nominal yield monitisations.

[Akinkinit]

The answer is acronym.

 

What's the next number in this sequence:

1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, <?>

[Breloomancer]

This one's easy, those are just

numbers in the padovan sequence.

It goes: 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 7 9 12 16 21 ect

 

[Guest]

Bre, you need a riddle

 

This one is easy

 

1 1 2 3 5 8 [?]

 

What about this?

 

6 H A 2 D 3 L S J Q S

[jean-luc]

Bre, you need a riddle

 

This one is easy

 

1 1 2 3 5 8 [?]

 

Fibbonaci sequence!

 

1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 ...

 

What about this?

 

6 H A 2 D 3 L S J Q S

 

No idea

[Guest]

The answer is 7 or something else.

 

This is the fluffiest riddle you'll ever read, with lots of false flags, it's probably too easy too.

 

It's sometimes red, or blue or green, but can't be seen by submarine. It's not living or dead cause it's all in your head, and always best in a comfy bed. For some it's active, others it's absent, but can easily be radical or quiescent; and can teach you things better than dreams as long as you heed its warnings. There's no limit to speed or accuracy indeed, cause if you don't know, then it won't show. So have a go and let me know if you decipher this child-like rhyme.