Three Masters of Logic wanted to find out who was the wisest amongst them. So they turned to their Grand Master, asking to resolve their dispute. “Easy,” the old sage said. "I will blindfold you and paint either red, or blue dot on each man’s forehead. When I take your blindfolds off, if you see at least one red dot, raise your hand. The one, who guesses the color of the dot on his forehead first, wins." And so it was said, and so it was done. The Grand Master blindfolded the three contestants and painted red dots on every one. When he took their blindfolds off, all three men raised their hands as the rules required, and sat in silence pondering. Finally, one of them said: "I have a red dot on my forehead."
How did he guess?
SOLUTION IN "COMMENTS"
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Fatalism Necessarily fails if we have a peek into the content of fate
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE IT (do so after reading what's below)The philosopher Richard Taylor in his essay "Fate" introduces the possibility of some character, Osmo to have access to his Fatalistic bibliography. Assuming Fatalism is true (in the sense of a pre-existing body of truth, about past present and future), is it consistent to permit an arbitrary degree of epistemological insight into "facts" aobout one's life? A related question would be whether one can falsify the content of this Fatalistic prophecy about oneself?
I wrote an essay on this topic recently and used some plausibility arguments and also a purely logical one. The purely logical proof of the incompatibility of our insight into the content of Osmo type book and the content actually obtaining is above. In particular the proof demonstrates the limits of what the book can contain if one was allowed a peek.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Mission: a survey of the two human types and their interactions
Below are some excerpts from mission reports of the Andromedian's research of human behavior through a method known as "Host Control". This particular approach allows the Andromedian experts to reside inside a human mind in a manner akin to the Cartesian homunculus, thus allowing for the study of the correlations of cognitive and physiological phenomena with behavior. If necessary a complete control of the host is possible and legal by "The Alien Species Protection Act"..
"Type I individual" Mission Report.
"At times, when confronted with a particular individual of type II, the most accurate description of the sensation that could be given is akin to the impulse one experiences to pulverize an unexpectedly encountered Giant Roach back on the home planet of Zix. One desires to pulverize it, the individual that is. From the up-to-date linguistic analysis, this sensation is referred to as "annoyance".
At other times, confronted again by some type II individual a peculiar somatic phenomenon occurs: without any conscious intention, (as far as the sensors of the higher cognitive functions are concerned) the facial muscles tense into some type of cramp, manifesting with the teeth being exposed and the cheeks lifting up (again, semantic analysis of local foraging habits has found this to mean "a smile"), causing the sensors register a rise in upper body temperature, accompanied by enormous amounts of rather complex proteins being secreted by the skin tissue; a whole cloud of them as a matter of fact. It is suspected that this is a neurotoxin designed to partially paralyze the other individual who is then forced to respond with a similar facial grimace, although with varying intensity. The individuals most affected by the toxin tend to approach closer, which supports the theory of the chemical cloud being a kind of lure.
Theory explains this complex phenomenon as a predatory strategy intended to lure other individuals to a vicinity sufficient for a lethal strike, although that has not yet been observed. However it is very likely since a variety of marine creatures and plants on that planet hunt in exactly that manner, and teeth exposure accompanying the behavior supports predatory intentions.
This peculiar phenomena rarely occurs when confronted by another type I individual, with the exception of the facial contortion, which although sometimes does appear, but when it does it displays the hallmarks of voluntary and controlled behavior."
"Type II individual" Mission Report
This is a description of an incident where the circumstances caused one of the research experts to lose control of the host, and as a result abort the mission. The incident occurred in a rather loud and dim environment, where plenty of other individuals of both types were present. Most of them moved with a more or less synchronous manner to the ambient sounds of the local environment. This is his report:
"Type I individual" Mission Report.
"At times, when confronted with a particular individual of type II, the most accurate description of the sensation that could be given is akin to the impulse one experiences to pulverize an unexpectedly encountered Giant Roach back on the home planet of Zix. One desires to pulverize it, the individual that is. From the up-to-date linguistic analysis, this sensation is referred to as "annoyance".
At other times, confronted again by some type II individual a peculiar somatic phenomenon occurs: without any conscious intention, (as far as the sensors of the higher cognitive functions are concerned) the facial muscles tense into some type of cramp, manifesting with the teeth being exposed and the cheeks lifting up (again, semantic analysis of local foraging habits has found this to mean "a smile"), causing the sensors register a rise in upper body temperature, accompanied by enormous amounts of rather complex proteins being secreted by the skin tissue; a whole cloud of them as a matter of fact. It is suspected that this is a neurotoxin designed to partially paralyze the other individual who is then forced to respond with a similar facial grimace, although with varying intensity. The individuals most affected by the toxin tend to approach closer, which supports the theory of the chemical cloud being a kind of lure.
Theory explains this complex phenomenon as a predatory strategy intended to lure other individuals to a vicinity sufficient for a lethal strike, although that has not yet been observed. However it is very likely since a variety of marine creatures and plants on that planet hunt in exactly that manner, and teeth exposure accompanying the behavior supports predatory intentions.
This peculiar phenomena rarely occurs when confronted by another type I individual, with the exception of the facial contortion, which although sometimes does appear, but when it does it displays the hallmarks of voluntary and controlled behavior."
"Type II individual" Mission Report
This is a description of an incident where the circumstances caused one of the research experts to lose control of the host, and as a result abort the mission. The incident occurred in a rather loud and dim environment, where plenty of other individuals of both types were present. Most of them moved with a more or less synchronous manner to the ambient sounds of the local environment. This is his report:
"Upon approaching one of the other type individuals the first signs of trouble appeared; I became aware of blood pressure drop in the central navigation/cognition system which made controlling the host substantially more difficult. At the same time the sensors indicated a blood pressure rise and concentration in some lower part of the body. This completely unexpected and novel phenomenon forced me to put the Mission Alert System on standby.
The other individual, a type I, displayed a facial grimace consisting in the teeth being exposed, similar to the one encountered in previous missions and described in detail by Dr Xerox in his seminal paper "Facial contortion correlations with spasmodic and unintelligible vocal raps".
The body of the host acquired at this stage a peculiarly intense tendency of attempting to draw closer to the type I, and I had to try my best in order to restrain the host from coming to physical contact with the type I, which it attempted in a variety of subtle and cunning ways. What made it difficult to control was the fact that I was dealing with a very low level program, running somewhere in the background which could not be traced by my sensors in any part of the cerebral cortex.
Then the equally unexpected, and vastly more dangerous series of events developed. The steadily maintained facial grimace of the type I, and a piercing gaze fixed on my host, caused the trunk of the host to move decisively forward nearing its muzzle dangerously close to the type I. Surprised by this sudden attack, all the other individual seemed to be capable of doing in a futile and desperate feat of defense was to close its eyes and purse its lips (possibly a defense mechanism, although its efficiency is not yet entirely known). A fraction of a second before what appeared to be a certain collision of heads I was forced to inject a prodigious dose of emergency sedative into the host's bloodstream, which to my relief worked surprisingly fast due to the dangerously low blood pressure in the upper part of the body at this stage.
My only defense for resorting to such drastic measures, which may have compromised the outcome of the mission, must be the fact that I was not briefed on the standard procedures implemented in cases when the host engages in hostile behavior, which was clearly what was happening ."
The other individual, a type I, displayed a facial grimace consisting in the teeth being exposed, similar to the one encountered in previous missions and described in detail by Dr Xerox in his seminal paper "Facial contortion correlations with spasmodic and unintelligible vocal raps".
The body of the host acquired at this stage a peculiarly intense tendency of attempting to draw closer to the type I, and I had to try my best in order to restrain the host from coming to physical contact with the type I, which it attempted in a variety of subtle and cunning ways. What made it difficult to control was the fact that I was dealing with a very low level program, running somewhere in the background which could not be traced by my sensors in any part of the cerebral cortex.
Then the equally unexpected, and vastly more dangerous series of events developed. The steadily maintained facial grimace of the type I, and a piercing gaze fixed on my host, caused the trunk of the host to move decisively forward nearing its muzzle dangerously close to the type I. Surprised by this sudden attack, all the other individual seemed to be capable of doing in a futile and desperate feat of defense was to close its eyes and purse its lips (possibly a defense mechanism, although its efficiency is not yet entirely known). A fraction of a second before what appeared to be a certain collision of heads I was forced to inject a prodigious dose of emergency sedative into the host's bloodstream, which to my relief worked surprisingly fast due to the dangerously low blood pressure in the upper part of the body at this stage.
My only defense for resorting to such drastic measures, which may have compromised the outcome of the mission, must be the fact that I was not briefed on the standard procedures implemented in cases when the host engages in hostile behavior, which was clearly what was happening ."
Lucid Sententia XV
A poet suffers in a profound and sophisticated manner. Hence the capacity to report on his suffering with the eloquence of an expert.
Lucid sententia XIV
We're but mysterious collections of particular instances of universal tendencies.
Lucid Sententia XIII
Life is our drug of choice; we keep on taking it despite its painful side effects.
Monday, August 3, 2009
L.I.F.E
last edited 23 August 2009
It was both the unbearably increasing monotony of most of the daily activities, and the discovery of the mechanisms governing the illusion of time that led the brilliant employee of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Martin Parmenstein to finally bring himself to carry out a project which he had been anticipating intermittently since college. Deeply harbored metaphysical concerns fueled Martin to consider himself as the first test subject of this existential optimizer device. This is why writing the Life Intensity Full Enhancement (LIFE) algorithm would not only be the first step of this grandiose project but it would eventually change his life forever.
Martin’s PhD dissertation The Influence of Prior Stimulus Distribution Saturation on Time Perception and Memory Enhancement essentially proposed what could be understood as an elixir of youth simulation. The theory explained the commonly known phenomenon of changes to our subjective perception of time with ageing and proposed a way of eliminating it by simulating an experience of being that is lucid, enthusiastic and carefree: the hallmarks of youth which nature inevitably denies us in later life.
Martin’s explanation relied on the widely documented evidence of our adaptation to repeated stimuli. Repeated exposure to similar stimuli eventually ceases to register as unique, and we have no conscious memory of it, or more specifically we have no way of distinguishing one repeated stimuli event from another. This is naturally the result of the evolutionary optimization of energy strategy which our brains employ.
Eventually this results in a task distribution in accordance with what is today referred to as Parmenstein’s Law, which essentially states that the level of consciousness governing the response to a given stimuli is inversely proportional to the frequency of exposure to that stimuli . Simply put the law states that the more frequent the occurrence the lower the level of consciousness which will deal with it. This makes an activity such as walking practically automatic.
The consequences of this fact carry over immediately to our memories of the world; the very rare and hence unique experiences will stand out above others in our minds, whereas the chains of routine ultimately dissolve into oblivion of amnesia at best. The other alternative that awaits mundane and repeated experiences is that of mutual homogenization resulting in a collage of memories of an action to make up the actual memory; remembering the act of locking the front door last week is no more than a mnemonic tapestry of the more lucid fragments originating from all the times this act has been performed. Such a chimera is the best raft of clarity in this otherwise ocean of amnesia that our mind can construct, and hence nominate it to the status of a memory.
The final piece of Martin’s Thesis was the claim that it is those unique experiences that serve as the mnemonic milestones dictating the perception of the passage of time and hence also its anticipation. Anticipation of time has a fundamental importance in making plans and setting goals, which are essential in furnishing our lives with meaning. Furthermore the temporal “spaces” between these milestones, Martin believes, are constant due to neurological hardware limitations.
The conclusion then is that our perception of time is determined by the richness of our experiences. To a child, every day brings new and unique experiences, such as going to the movies for the first time or seeing the sea or just hearing a fire engine siren. Hence the weekend seems like a very long time, and the school brake almost like eternity. As we grow older this constant set of stimuli does not change substantially and what’s more we tend to gradually diminish it with our daily, self imposed routine, a tendency which enhances the impoverishment of stimuli. Weekends become insignificant instants mainly due to the fact that a two day period rarely brings anything unique enough t o register as a milestone. By this merciless mechanism, in old age we are but somnambulists whose dreams are no more than kaleidoscopic projections of our memories of childhood and youth.
If one was able to enrich the distribution of stimuli in one’s life then not only the anticipation of each day would be comparable to that of what a child experiences on the eve of Boxing Day but also the memories of it would be proportionally rich and vivid. The implementation of LIFE to one’s life, Martin believed was the answer.
In theory, LIFE’s function is essentially the inverse of Permenstein’s law; it would counterbalance the inevitable suppression of awareness of stimuli to lower levels of consciousness by substantially reducing the frequency of repetition of stimuli by means of novel modifications of their content. For example the route taken to the office every day by a given subject would have certain alternations and idiosyncrasies introduced in order to make each journey vividly distinct. The means of transport may be proposed to alternate between driving, public transport, taking a taxi, riding a bike or a scooter, or some combination of those during a single journey. On public transport one may be advised to engage in conversation with strangers.
Such behavioral differentiation would be implemented to all other facets of life, such as choice of leisure or culinary dishes. Incidentally LIFE had been condemned by the Vatican, soon after Martin’s paper appeared in Nature, due to the necessary promiscuous tendencies it advocated. Needless to say the New York Times headline “Pope condemns LIFE” provoked an outrage within the entire Christian community, consequently reviving the abortion debate. As a matter of fact LIFE’s parameters would naturally be custom calibrated to correspond to each client’s deeply cherished beliefs so neither a religious person would be encouraged to commit adultery nor an atheist expected to make the Hajj. Effectively the subject would appear to an onlooker as adventurous, spontaneous, curious, possibly immature and finally outright childish.
Prior to receiving his PhD in Algorithmic Metaphysics, Martin encountered three serious objections to LIFE, one from each of the three academic auditors. Naturally those objections had to be refuted in order for his dissertation to be accepted. The first one questioned the efficiency of LIFE’s mechanism, by pointing to the supposedly excessive set of novel changes and alternations its application would require.
After all, the professor argued, rendering a set of experiences unique can be achieved a lot more efficiently using a formal approach. This means that no actual states of affairs need to be altered, but only the perceptual construct of the subject. By dramatically changing a given subject’s worldview one could thereby change the subject’s experience of the world. So for example, instead of alternating between various means of transport taken to the office and the random introduction of idiosyncratic behavioral tendencies, an alternation between radically different psychological constructs would make each journey equally unique. Insofar as human imagination is capable of accommodating and harboring an almost infinite variety of worldviews, a pre-fabricated set of metaphysical and epistemological systems could be within reach to absorb and allow seeing the world in a new light. After all an ordinary bus ride experienced with the conviction that all that exists, does so in virtue of being perceived isn’t the same as riding it tormented by the thought that this bus ride is just a way filling out a sequence of events which are necessarily predetermined . The technical aspect, although non trivial would certainly not be insurmountable; a world system generator placed on the bedside table would instantiate a new Grand Unified Theory each evening which would then be absorbed by the subject during sleep. A mere rewiring of the cerebral cortex would have the effect of conjuring up a new universe each morning.
This approach Martin argued, although attractive due to its apparent simplicity of method and robustness of effects, could not be considered for ethical reasons. A person’s mind tampered in this fashion would in principle be equivalent to being rendered schizophrenic with a unique delusion dominating each day. Furthermore, the overwhelming contrasts of meaning and significance resulting from the irreconcilable worldviews would make it impossible for any coherent memory thread to exist, since its content would be interpreted with systematic inconsistency. As a result no genuine notion of self could emerge – a consequence surely undesirable for anyone with the hope of improving their experience of the world. If there wouldn’t be a self experiencing this epistemological freak show, then there can be no talk of any variety of experience at all.
To be continued...
It was both the unbearably increasing monotony of most of the daily activities, and the discovery of the mechanisms governing the illusion of time that led the brilliant employee of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Martin Parmenstein to finally bring himself to carry out a project which he had been anticipating intermittently since college. Deeply harbored metaphysical concerns fueled Martin to consider himself as the first test subject of this existential optimizer device. This is why writing the Life Intensity Full Enhancement (LIFE) algorithm would not only be the first step of this grandiose project but it would eventually change his life forever.
Martin’s PhD dissertation The Influence of Prior Stimulus Distribution Saturation on Time Perception and Memory Enhancement essentially proposed what could be understood as an elixir of youth simulation. The theory explained the commonly known phenomenon of changes to our subjective perception of time with ageing and proposed a way of eliminating it by simulating an experience of being that is lucid, enthusiastic and carefree: the hallmarks of youth which nature inevitably denies us in later life.
Martin’s explanation relied on the widely documented evidence of our adaptation to repeated stimuli. Repeated exposure to similar stimuli eventually ceases to register as unique, and we have no conscious memory of it, or more specifically we have no way of distinguishing one repeated stimuli event from another. This is naturally the result of the evolutionary optimization of energy strategy which our brains employ.
Eventually this results in a task distribution in accordance with what is today referred to as Parmenstein’s Law, which essentially states that the level of consciousness governing the response to a given stimuli is inversely proportional to the frequency of exposure to that stimuli . Simply put the law states that the more frequent the occurrence the lower the level of consciousness which will deal with it. This makes an activity such as walking practically automatic.
The consequences of this fact carry over immediately to our memories of the world; the very rare and hence unique experiences will stand out above others in our minds, whereas the chains of routine ultimately dissolve into oblivion of amnesia at best. The other alternative that awaits mundane and repeated experiences is that of mutual homogenization resulting in a collage of memories of an action to make up the actual memory; remembering the act of locking the front door last week is no more than a mnemonic tapestry of the more lucid fragments originating from all the times this act has been performed. Such a chimera is the best raft of clarity in this otherwise ocean of amnesia that our mind can construct, and hence nominate it to the status of a memory.
The final piece of Martin’s Thesis was the claim that it is those unique experiences that serve as the mnemonic milestones dictating the perception of the passage of time and hence also its anticipation. Anticipation of time has a fundamental importance in making plans and setting goals, which are essential in furnishing our lives with meaning. Furthermore the temporal “spaces” between these milestones, Martin believes, are constant due to neurological hardware limitations.
The conclusion then is that our perception of time is determined by the richness of our experiences. To a child, every day brings new and unique experiences, such as going to the movies for the first time or seeing the sea or just hearing a fire engine siren. Hence the weekend seems like a very long time, and the school brake almost like eternity. As we grow older this constant set of stimuli does not change substantially and what’s more we tend to gradually diminish it with our daily, self imposed routine, a tendency which enhances the impoverishment of stimuli. Weekends become insignificant instants mainly due to the fact that a two day period rarely brings anything unique enough t o register as a milestone. By this merciless mechanism, in old age we are but somnambulists whose dreams are no more than kaleidoscopic projections of our memories of childhood and youth.
If one was able to enrich the distribution of stimuli in one’s life then not only the anticipation of each day would be comparable to that of what a child experiences on the eve of Boxing Day but also the memories of it would be proportionally rich and vivid. The implementation of LIFE to one’s life, Martin believed was the answer.
In theory, LIFE’s function is essentially the inverse of Permenstein’s law; it would counterbalance the inevitable suppression of awareness of stimuli to lower levels of consciousness by substantially reducing the frequency of repetition of stimuli by means of novel modifications of their content. For example the route taken to the office every day by a given subject would have certain alternations and idiosyncrasies introduced in order to make each journey vividly distinct. The means of transport may be proposed to alternate between driving, public transport, taking a taxi, riding a bike or a scooter, or some combination of those during a single journey. On public transport one may be advised to engage in conversation with strangers.
Such behavioral differentiation would be implemented to all other facets of life, such as choice of leisure or culinary dishes. Incidentally LIFE had been condemned by the Vatican, soon after Martin’s paper appeared in Nature, due to the necessary promiscuous tendencies it advocated. Needless to say the New York Times headline “Pope condemns LIFE” provoked an outrage within the entire Christian community, consequently reviving the abortion debate. As a matter of fact LIFE’s parameters would naturally be custom calibrated to correspond to each client’s deeply cherished beliefs so neither a religious person would be encouraged to commit adultery nor an atheist expected to make the Hajj. Effectively the subject would appear to an onlooker as adventurous, spontaneous, curious, possibly immature and finally outright childish.
Prior to receiving his PhD in Algorithmic Metaphysics, Martin encountered three serious objections to LIFE, one from each of the three academic auditors. Naturally those objections had to be refuted in order for his dissertation to be accepted. The first one questioned the efficiency of LIFE’s mechanism, by pointing to the supposedly excessive set of novel changes and alternations its application would require.
After all, the professor argued, rendering a set of experiences unique can be achieved a lot more efficiently using a formal approach. This means that no actual states of affairs need to be altered, but only the perceptual construct of the subject. By dramatically changing a given subject’s worldview one could thereby change the subject’s experience of the world. So for example, instead of alternating between various means of transport taken to the office and the random introduction of idiosyncratic behavioral tendencies, an alternation between radically different psychological constructs would make each journey equally unique. Insofar as human imagination is capable of accommodating and harboring an almost infinite variety of worldviews, a pre-fabricated set of metaphysical and epistemological systems could be within reach to absorb and allow seeing the world in a new light. After all an ordinary bus ride experienced with the conviction that all that exists, does so in virtue of being perceived isn’t the same as riding it tormented by the thought that this bus ride is just a way filling out a sequence of events which are necessarily predetermined . The technical aspect, although non trivial would certainly not be insurmountable; a world system generator placed on the bedside table would instantiate a new Grand Unified Theory each evening which would then be absorbed by the subject during sleep. A mere rewiring of the cerebral cortex would have the effect of conjuring up a new universe each morning.
This approach Martin argued, although attractive due to its apparent simplicity of method and robustness of effects, could not be considered for ethical reasons. A person’s mind tampered in this fashion would in principle be equivalent to being rendered schizophrenic with a unique delusion dominating each day. Furthermore, the overwhelming contrasts of meaning and significance resulting from the irreconcilable worldviews would make it impossible for any coherent memory thread to exist, since its content would be interpreted with systematic inconsistency. As a result no genuine notion of self could emerge – a consequence surely undesirable for anyone with the hope of improving their experience of the world. If there wouldn’t be a self experiencing this epistemological freak show, then there can be no talk of any variety of experience at all.
To be continued...
Thursday, July 9, 2009
A taste of the absurd
WOODY ALLEN: That's quite a lovely Jackson Pollock, isn't it?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: Yes it is.
WOODY ALLEN: What does it say to you?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: It restates the negativeness of the universe, the hideous lonely emptiness of existence, nothingness, the predicament of man forced to live in a barren, godless eternity, like a tiny flame flickering in an immense void, with nothing but waste, horror, and degradation, forming a useless bleak straightjacket in a black absurd cosmos.
WOODY ALLEN: What are you doing Saturday night?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: Committing suicide.
WOODY ALLEN: What about Friday night?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: [leaves silently]
"Play It Again, Sam", Paramount Pictures, 1972;
GIRL IN MUSEUM: Yes it is.
WOODY ALLEN: What does it say to you?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: It restates the negativeness of the universe, the hideous lonely emptiness of existence, nothingness, the predicament of man forced to live in a barren, godless eternity, like a tiny flame flickering in an immense void, with nothing but waste, horror, and degradation, forming a useless bleak straightjacket in a black absurd cosmos.
WOODY ALLEN: What are you doing Saturday night?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: Committing suicide.
WOODY ALLEN: What about Friday night?
GIRL IN MUSEUM: [leaves silently]
"Play It Again, Sam", Paramount Pictures, 1972;
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Spiritual Taxonomy
There are two types of spirits - those in whose company, immediate or remote, our spirit blooms or withers.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Punished for love
An innocent heart needs to be restrained so it doesn't hurt itself.
With the “age of reason” comes the ability to lock it away in an asylum of reason, where it sobs quietly.
Then the apparent coldness of the host is in fact the face of a warden.
* * *
On rare occasions however, in a futile spasm of defiance, the prisoner gathers all of its residual strength and attempts to free itself by striking the cell door with clenched fists...till they start bleeding.
The warden doesn't stir, as the dull banging resounds accross the hollow corridors of the prison.
This paroxysm of agony ends as the heart collapses to the cell floor, once again having depleted the last breath of love.
The disillusioned role of friendship
The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that a true friend is but a refuge. A healing, illusory sanctuary from ourselves or from the rest of the world, when either of them becomes unbearable.
That's why true friends need to be kept in an existential quarantine, away from all that they are meant to heal - ready to offer their idealised self on cue, whenever we need it. Also this is why the elimination of this necessary isolation ruins friendships or gives them the grotesque intermittent form.
That's why true friends need to be kept in an existential quarantine, away from all that they are meant to heal - ready to offer their idealised self on cue, whenever we need it. Also this is why the elimination of this necessary isolation ruins friendships or gives them the grotesque intermittent form.
Why do the Muses abandon the heart?
What inevitable curse forces the Muses
to abandon the shelter of the living heart?
What had once flourished with a glittering rhythm of song
becomes a howling pit tormented with ghosts of memory.
Those eternal beauties get weary of this weathered shell
and its dull beat forced by the merciless reigns of night and day,
so they flee, dancing to the quiet, hollow requiem of the soul.
to abandon the shelter of the living heart?
What had once flourished with a glittering rhythm of song
becomes a howling pit tormented with ghosts of memory.
Those eternal beauties get weary of this weathered shell
and its dull beat forced by the merciless reigns of night and day,
so they flee, dancing to the quiet, hollow requiem of the soul.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
To change, or not to change?
MONTY HALL DILEMMA
Description
The following scenario, known as "The Monty Hall Problem" derives its origin from an American game show from the 60's "Let's make a Deal!". The host's name was Monty Hall. There are two goats and a car behind three doors. Your objective is to point to a door where you believe the car may be, and Monty, the game show host, reveals one of the goats (behind one of the other doors) to make life easier for you. Then he makes a deal with you by giving you a chance to change your choice, if you wish to do so, or to remain with your original choice.
Informal proof of the result
What follows may be considered a proof of the Monty Hall outcomes, even for those with little knowledge of probability.
Only one case will be dealt with - why changing gives a 2/3 probability of winning. Realize that 1/3 winning and 2/3 loosing are synonyms in this particular case. So a 2/3 probability of winning upon changing is synonymous with, a 1/3 probability of loosing upon changing.
Also a 2/3 probability of winning upon changing, is synonymous with a 1/3 probability of winning upon staying, which then is equivalent to a 2/3 probability of loosing upon staying. So the above basically states that the following proof only needs to cover one scenario.
Here it goes:
Due to the nature of the content behind the doors we can deduce a priori that by randomly picking a door we're likely, 2 out of 3 to pick a Goat.
That is, the probability that we've picked a Goat on the first pick is 2/3.
I hope that is straightforward so far.
It follows from the above that if we were to change our choice, the probability that we would be changing from a Goat would also be 2/3. This is the key observation.
But, since Monty has already exposed the other Goat, that change would certainly be to a Car. [Edit: not exactly --- correct this].
So to sum up, whenever we pick a Goat on the first pick, by changing we're certain to pick a Car. But since the probability of picking a Goat in the first pick is 2/3, so is the probability of picking a car upon changing. QED
For a fun simulation of the Monty Hall game show click here.
Description
The following scenario, known as "The Monty Hall Problem" derives its origin from an American game show from the 60's "Let's make a Deal!". The host's name was Monty Hall. There are two goats and a car behind three doors. Your objective is to point to a door where you believe the car may be, and Monty, the game show host, reveals one of the goats (behind one of the other doors) to make life easier for you. Then he makes a deal with you by giving you a chance to change your choice, if you wish to do so, or to remain with your original choice.
Informal proof of the result
What follows may be considered a proof of the Monty Hall outcomes, even for those with little knowledge of probability.
Only one case will be dealt with - why changing gives a 2/3 probability of winning. Realize that 1/3 winning and 2/3 loosing are synonyms in this particular case. So a 2/3 probability of winning upon changing is synonymous with, a 1/3 probability of loosing upon changing.
Also a 2/3 probability of winning upon changing, is synonymous with a 1/3 probability of winning upon staying, which then is equivalent to a 2/3 probability of loosing upon staying. So the above basically states that the following proof only needs to cover one scenario.
Here it goes:
Due to the nature of the content behind the doors we can deduce a priori that by randomly picking a door we're likely, 2 out of 3 to pick a Goat.
That is, the probability that we've picked a Goat on the first pick is 2/3.
I hope that is straightforward so far.
It follows from the above that if we were to change our choice, the probability that we would be changing from a Goat would also be 2/3. This is the key observation.
But, since Monty has already exposed the other Goat, that change would certainly be to a Car. [Edit: not exactly --- correct this].
So to sum up, whenever we pick a Goat on the first pick, by changing we're certain to pick a Car. But since the probability of picking a Goat in the first pick is 2/3, so is the probability of picking a car upon changing. QED
For a fun simulation of the Monty Hall game show click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)