🚀 go-pugleaf

 
|> >Monty hasn't given you new information, he has given you a new
|> >question.  At the point where he asks you if you want to switch, the fact
|> >that you had a 33% chance previously doesn't affect you new decision; two
|> >doors, one prize.
|> 
|> The fact that the door which used to be closed is now known to be a loser
|> is new information.  Specifically, if I guessed a goat (probability 2/3),
|> then he's now shown me where the winner is.
|> 
|> 	- kitten

The fact that you now have an open door with a goat behind it does not
change the fact that you have 2 door and 1 prize.  The opening of the
third door only tells you that the prize is not behind that door, it does
not add any information as to where the prize really is.  Or put it another
way, if you consider this new information on the same puzzle, why do you
freeze the probability of the original guess at 33%?  To freeze the original
probabilities at their "pre-new-information" levels means that your are not
using that new information.  The new information would apply equally to all
doors that are left, and adjusts the probability to 50%.  The original
assumption of 33% chance per door was based upon 3 closed doors.  The new
question is which of 2 closed doors has the prize.


-- 
Dennis Worden, not representing $  When the TEAM succeeds, you succeed,
anybody, not even himself, in   $  but when the Team fails, you're FIRED.
any way shape or form.          $  Don't EMAIL me at worden@berlioz.nsc.com