|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 17, 2007 13:53:52 GMT
When you are driving in another state
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 17, 2007 22:51:48 GMT
When you are driving in another state Cute, but not even close. You can't drive, eat, move your bowels, get a ticket or have a baby at that time. It happens only once a year.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 17, 2007 23:46:07 GMT
Ah, wait! When the clocks go forward, there is a 'dead' hour in which nothing can happen because the hour does not actually exist. Is that it?
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 17, 2007 23:50:41 GMT
yes.
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 18, 2007 0:08:30 GMT
Your turn now.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2007 1:05:09 GMT
Drat! I used to know quite a few of these, but I've forgotten a lot...
Still, maybe one or two may filter through the fog of memory...
***
A man is in a prison cell awaiting execution for a crime he did not commit. The executioner, being a sadist, tells the prisoner that he will be forced to choose the manner of his own execution: if the next sentence he speaks is a lie, he will be shot. If the next sentence he speaks is the truth, he will hang. The prisoner replies, and the executioner howls in rage, realising he will never be able to execute his prisoner after all.
What did the prisoner say to escape execution?
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 1:40:41 GMT
"I will be shot"
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2007 1:46:46 GMT
Is correct.
At this rate I'm gonna have to resort to Zen...
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 1:48:57 GMT
Is this supposed to be turn based? if it is, I cede my place to whomever gets here first.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2007 1:51:36 GMT
It's more sort of 'If you got one post it' right now.
If all else fails, Zen questions will always drive people barmy, but I'd rather not. It's a bit unfair ;D
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 18, 2007 1:53:30 GMT
Imagine if you will, three gentleman, Mr. Black, Mr. Brown and Mr. White, who so detest each other that they decided to resolve their differences with pistols. It's kind of like a duel—only a three-way duel. And unlike the gunfights of the old West, where the participants would simultaneously draw their guns and shoot at each other, these three gentlemen have come up with a rather more civilized approach.
Mr. White is the worst shot of the three and hits his target one time out of three. Mr. Brown is twice as good and hits his target two times out of three. Mr. Black is deadly. He never misses. Whomever he shoots at is a goner.
To even the odds a bit, Mr. White is given first shot. Mr. Brown is next, if he's still alive. He's followed by Mr. Black, if he's still alive.
They will continue shooting like this, in this order, until two of them are dead.
Here's the question: Mr. White is the first shooter. Remember, he's the worst shot. At whom should he aim his first shot to maximize his chances of surviving?
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 2:00:35 GMT
To Mr. Brown.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2007 2:01:58 GMT
Himself. If he shoots at either of the other two and hits, the survivor will shoot back at him. As he only hits 1/3 of the time, his next two shots will miss, and the best odds he has are 2/3 - guaranteeing his death. If he misses himself, his odds for the next shot are 1/2.
Mr Brown will shoot at Mr Black as the biggest threat. If he hits, the chance of his next shot hitting is 1/2 - identical to Mr White. And Mr White gets to shoot first.
If Mr Brown misses, Mr Black will shoot Mr Brown first as the biggest threat.
So by shooting at himself, Mr White actually increases his statistical chances of survival ;D
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 2:27:12 GMT
Actually, that's not correct. If we assume that White's shooting accuracy is still 1/3 no matter the range, he still has a 33% probability of killing himself that way.
He should shoot either the air or the ground. That way the probablity of being killed by the first shot drops to zero.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2007 2:33:47 GMT
Bizarrely, no. If he aims at the air or the ground and scores a hit on either, his next two shots miss...
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 3:04:51 GMT
And if he aims to himself and scores a hit, he doesn't have two other shots to miss...
Math backs me on this one, trust me. Let's see what Cleg has to say.
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 18, 2007 3:26:42 GMT
Mr. White should aim at no one. He should miss. Then Mr. Brown and Mr. Black have to go at each other. So after Mr. White misses, Mr. Brown whose shot it is now will obviously take aim at Mr. Black. If he misses then Mr. Black will return fire and kill Mr. Brown.
It's then Mr. White's shot again. So by shooting at nobody he guarantees himself a second shot. He's still a lousy shot, one in three. But at least he gets to shoot first at the one and only opponent still standing.
If he had shot at one of the other men and, worst case scenario, killed him then he would probably be killed by the remaining opponent. But by shooting and missing he makes sure that Mr. Brown takes out Mr. Black or vice versa, and then it's his shot again. If he had killed Mr. Brown for example, he'd have no chance at a second shot. This way he's got a 100% chance of getting the first shot at the survivor.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Feb 18, 2007 3:31:12 GMT
well, yeah. That's what I said. The important thing, from a mathematical standpoint, is that he shouldn't aim at either the other two or him.
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Feb 18, 2007 3:48:53 GMT
Suppose we make the statement, "All members of The Chaos Cascade Forum are geniuses."
Now, suppose we find 100 people who are not members of the Chaos Cascade forum and are not geniuses. Does this confirm the statement? Does this deny the statement? Does this prove the statement? Does this disprove the statement? Or is it totally irrelevant?
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Feb 18, 2007 6:08:32 GMT
Totally irrelevant.
not related to the argument and not a valid comparision..
|
|