0% |
1.1% (7) | |
25% |
5.6% (35) | |
33% |
18.7% (117) | |
50% |
63.8% (399) | |
66% |
3.7% (23) | |
75% |
3.5% (22) | |
100% |
3.5% (22) |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 31) | |
Copy Clerk Posts: 56 Joined: 6 Apr 2008 | |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 2381 Joined: 6 Mar 2008 | 50% surely...? Unless I'm missing something. |
BANNED Posts: 2994 Joined: 16 Aug 2008 | No offfence but this thread is kinda stupid, and further more it's also pointless. But whatever. I'm guessing 50% User was banned for: Ketchup Packets... Why in the heck are they sooo small?. (Permanent) |
Copy Clerk Posts: 91 Joined: 19 Jun 2008 | well, if their is only 2 beagles, we know one is a male, then thier is a 50/50 chance of the other being male or female.... |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 599 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 | Does it matter what gender the other dog is? |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3692 Joined: 18 Dec 2007 | The chance that both dogs are male is 25%. Flip two coins, whats the chance of both being heads or both being tales? 25% with a 50% that one will be heads one will be tails. The same thing applies here. I think. I might have read the question wrong. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1444 Joined: 16 May 2008 | Okay. I feel stupid, but the 75% was jumping out at me. Just a little flag going up in my brain somewhere. Either that, or early onset dementia. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 407 Joined: 10 Sep 2008 | basically you're saying forget the dog we know is male, what's the other one? thusly it's 50/50 it can be male or it can be female. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1359 Joined: 21 May 2008 | Should we factor in the chance that it could be a hermaphrodite? |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1306 Joined: 17 Jun 2008 | It's a pretty basic math problem unless you're supposed to factor in what GhostOfSin suggested. Then it's just trying to be tricky. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 120 Joined: 28 Sep 2008 | 75% works because we know one is male and the chance the other is male is half of that (1\2 of 25% + 50% = 75%) I thought about this way too much. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1306 Joined: 17 Jun 2008 |
No, it would be 50% because it's a separate beagle, the other one being male would have no effect on it. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3692 Joined: 18 Dec 2007 |
Thats not the way probability works. To find the probability of two things you must multiply them. The chance of one dog being male is 50% or 1/2. 1/2 is 0.5. 0.5 times 0.5 is 0.25 or 25% The probability of both dogs being males is 25%. However looking at the question it appears to be asking what the chance of one dog being male is, which is 50%. It's a strange question that can interpreted differently. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 2146 Joined: 7 Sep 2008 |
You just made my day, GhostOfSin- heck, you just made my week. |
On the Record Posts: 5050 Joined: 3 Mar 2008 | 50%. Okay, factor in that it's a 100% chance that one of two is that it's female, and that the question asks what the other one will be, not regarding the male one. It has to be 50%, because no matter what, there's an even chance of being male or female. BASIC MATHS, PEOPLE: Read the question. They throw in Red Herrings on purpose. |
Anonymous Source Posts: 5 Joined: 12 Oct 2008 | Ok this is like the monty hall problem. Of these three possible outcomes, only one of them results in the second beagle being male. |
On the Record Posts: 6183 Joined: 10 Mar 2008 |
That's exactly what I was thinking after I finished reading the question... But it's 50%, we know one dog's a male and they're asking what's the probability of the other being male. It's not asking for the possibility of a pair or not, just if the other is male or not. 50% I just know there's something sinister behind this. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 120 Joined: 28 Sep 2008 | Damn you math!! Even outside of school you make me look stupid. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1444 Joined: 16 May 2008 |
Never thought to use the Monty Hall problem for this. Nice. |
Pulitzer Laureate Posts: 782 Joined: 12 Aug 2008 | 50%: It's either a male or its something else. |
Red Guard Posts: 4808 Joined: 14 Oct 2007 | Thing is, the gender of the second has no apparent relation to the gender of the first unless you factor in a whole shit load of biological variables which I don't really care to. As such, the two are as mutually exclusive as one coin-flip from the next. (Keep in mind that -any- series of coin results is as unlikely as any other.) So I'll say 50%. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1011 Joined: 1 Dec 2007 |
Not really.
This is the same thing |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 2146 Joined: 7 Sep 2008 |
This. Then again, I don't remember very much about probability and the last time I studied that subject was 5 years ago. |
On the Record Posts: 7296 Joined: 23 Dec 2007 | Yay Probability! If you flip a coin and it comes up Heads 7/20 tosses, what are the chances the 21st toss will be Heads again? |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1011 Joined: 1 Dec 2007 | -deleted (not worth it) |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1306 Joined: 17 Jun 2008 |
So is this thing right or were the rest of us right? |
On the Record Posts: 5768 Joined: 7 Mar 2008 | based on the question stated in the pole it's 50% the other one is male simply because you can disregard anything about the other dog, the lady is unsure if it's male or female but one is definitely male. so this means the other dog has a 50% chance of being male or female irregardless of the sex of the other dog |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1374 Joined: 12 Sep 2007 |
Give this person a banana. The two beagles are already selected as part of a set; thus the 33%. If you selected one beagle, discovered it was male, then selected another beagle, the chance would be 50%. But if you select them two at a time and identify one as male, you remove the chance that both are female before the second chance. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 56 Joined: 6 Apr 2008 |
Well, this is actually why I posted this topic. I think that this is the mathematically proven solution, atleast according to Wikipedia. However, if you think about the problem as the person randomly grabbed one and it happened to be male, instead of looking at both and then replying, I think the answer is actually 50%. This answer seems right to me because if they just randomly grab one, there's a 50% chance that he would have grabbed a male in one of the two m/f pairs, and a 100% chance in the m/m pair. So, at least to my tired brain, there's a 50% chance that the male is from the m/m pair and a 50% from the m/f pair, therefore a 50% of the other being male. That seemed to be vaguely like the Bertrand's box paradox. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 407 Joined: 10 Sep 2008 |
fixed: that says the same as the one above it so it's irrelevant |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1306 Joined: 17 Jun 2008 |
But the gender of the second one isn't dependent on the first one. It's still 50% right? |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 2146 Joined: 7 Sep 2008 |
Ah, but there's a reason it was like that- it was the order. |
Anonymous Source Posts: 5 Joined: 12 Oct 2008 |
... The wikipedia article states its 1/3, i was just explaining it. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 407 Joined: 10 Sep 2008 |
I came back for three mins. after leaving to have fun so im not getting into this cirle logic again |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 31) | |
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
I was looking around on the internet, and I found something about Marilyn vos Savant. When I was reading about it I saw an interesting math problem. This was taken directly from Wikipedia, so I'm not certain about its accuracy in wording:
Please answer the poll before reading on.
I think Vos Savant said that it was a 1/3 chance, although the Wikipedia article wasn't very clear about it. However, I though it was interesting, and since this is seems to be a smart forum, I thought I'd ask it here.