Three Doors with one prize

It's not as simple as that!

The "Host" KNOWS DAMN WELL that there is nothing behind the door that is opened. It is not a "random opening".

One party had "pre-knowledge".

Thus there is a flaw in the Monty Hall solution.

Hi,

Just a few points:
1. It not a trick question.
2. The Host is honest and not tricking anybody.
3. There is only one prize, behind one door.
4. The host opens one of empty doors, this is not allowed to be the contestants door (even if it is empty).
5. As was stated in reply, statistics is very relevent to Astronomy, a lot in the early Big Bang is based on such (e.g. CMR variations)

It also makes my brain hurt!,

John

The fact that the host "knew" that the opened door would be empty meant that we must throw the original 1-in-3 statistic into the dustbin and start again from scratch with a whole new situation.

The whole new situation is.................... 1-in-2.

Hi again,

Seems to be a bit of confusion. The Host is not playing the 'game', just added for human interest.

Could state problem:
Labels door 1 to 3.
Generate random number in range 1..3 (where prize is).
Generate another random number in range 1..3 (where guess is made).
Take away door with no prize (as long its not the door that was guessed)
Give option to stay or move.
Could do this multiple times and tally up wins versus losses for each stay or move.

Should not be too difficult to program,

John

The "host" IS playing the game john.

The host with pre-knowledge ERASED the 1-in-3 statistical chance.

The host REPLACED 1-in-3 with 1-in-2.

The host changed the rules half way through the game
(In effect swapping out one game for another game.)
so I will change the rules myself to illustrate the absurdity of the Monty Hall solution.

This time the host opens the door with the prize INSIDE.

What NOW are the chances of the prize being inside one of the other doors.

The answer is Zero.

Not 1-in-3 or or 2-in-3 or 1-in-2.