Originally posted by kbaumenThen you realize of course that we are talking about a simple two coin toss permutations problem. Nothing more and nothing to argue about really.
How many others? 1? 2? And how many how tried to show that your reasoning is wrong? 5? 6? Including the OP, whose intended solution was the one others and I gave. (Ok, I didn't give a solution early enough, I just entered the argument because I strongly agreed to one of the arguing sides).
Originally posted by kbaumenFirst you would have to know the difference between a permutation and a combination, coin tosses are a good way to model these and describe the various outcomes.
Where is the three-sided coin?
How are those tosses relevant to the children problem? (I'm not saying they aren't, I'm simply asking what you think and can you back it up).
41 pages in and still not a single response to one of my posts... what does a guy have to do to get a response from eldragonfly?
and by the way, when you say "useless tired explanations" and things to that effect, i believe you are looking for the word "unnecessary" because you think that a singular event in which you agreed with the solution was enough to convince us that you understand why the answer to this problem is 2/3. that's fine, but you've shown much more recently that even if you think the answer (to the original problem) is 2/3, you think so for an incorrect REASON. this is shown by the evidence of both falling into a similar probablistic trap on multiple occasions when posed with subsequent but similar questions, and by your seemingly constant assertion that the probability of a "one-time event" is different from that of a sustained number of trials.
this demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of probability, conditional or otherwise, on your part, and has sparked the numerous discussions leading to this out-and-out war in the forum. my candor here, admittedly, is with the hopes that i can goad you into a discussion in which i think my input would be useful, and moreover i just like telling people who use the "la la la i'm not listening defense" that it's not working. but i sincerely hope that you take the time to read this whole post, and not just my last few sentences, and acknowledge that i have a genuine interest in trying to help you find the root of why the answers to these problems (at least at their outset) elude you, and perhaps to end the food fight. or not. your choice.