Probability concepts like faith, as it exists in the dim intuition, through school education, the surface of that understanding, intuition often conflicts that again with a different point of view, must be thinking more in-depth study to be able to understand. Hot Monty Hall problem, and that is one example. There is not a simple probability, long confused with so many people and academics, the more deeply ponder the problems found. Since 1990, 1991 flared up in hot to 2000, there are more than 75 papers on the subject published in more than 40 kinds of academic journals and the public. Repeated encounters two kinds of conclusions, different views have been entangled, English Wiki is constantly updated information on both sides of the war
…show more content…
If we use statistical experiments to verify this particular scene, the statistical sample which can only be calculated in line with the scene, but not all of the data, different rules at this time experiments host opens the door, it shows different results. Prior to this, the experiment proved that the sample space and statistics are indiscriminately for all possible scenarios, the host at a different door innings preferences caused varying probability of each scenario there is another door car, but overall, or for all scenarios calculated the probability of another door car average of all scenarios is 2/3, as visual proof vos Savant, the proof and experimental statistical sample space out the same conclusion. So vos Savant is not just for specific scenes on the 3rd door is opened, but the general situation, not without …show more content…
We can use probability to determine the benefits of change it? Can not. Bayesian formula is not difficult to figure out, then the probability that the car door on the 2nd from 0-1 any kind is possible. The final results are not able to determine the probability calculation, it is by the moderator and participants respective decisions jointly determined. This is not a question of probability, is the game's problems [4]. We should use the model to solve the
If we use statistical experiments to verify this particular scene, the statistical sample which can only be calculated in line with the scene, but not all of the data, different rules at this time experiments host opens the door, it shows different results. Prior to this, the experiment proved that the sample space and statistics are indiscriminately for all possible scenarios, the host at a different door innings preferences caused varying probability of each scenario there is another door car, but overall, or for all scenarios calculated the probability of another door car average of all scenarios is 2/3, as visual proof vos Savant, the proof and experimental statistical sample space out the same conclusion. So vos Savant is not just for specific scenes on the 3rd door is opened, but the general situation, not without …show more content…
We can use probability to determine the benefits of change it? Can not. Bayesian formula is not difficult to figure out, then the probability that the car door on the 2nd from 0-1 any kind is possible. The final results are not able to determine the probability calculation, it is by the moderator and participants respective decisions jointly determined. This is not a question of probability, is the game's problems [4]. We should use the model to solve the