JustHer,
(1) Did it ever occur to you that one might draw more utility from the debates surrounding infinity than the post itself?
(2) In order to be able to back the currency of your comment up you must have intellectual reserves. Having the proper reserves entails that you must be aware of the difference between the literal as opposed to the figurative definition of infinity, which I propose you lay down. upon laying down this definition/conception, you will then need to demonstrate how the figurative conception can still be infinity and yet allow for fractions of it to exist--i.e. 1/4 of infinity. And so on.
INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari
This will not end well...
But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...
Hmm... But what if it does end well?
Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
A sort I could become accustomed to...
Very poorly worded question.
As for yeur chances, they suck, 1/4, 1/4, and 1/2 is beaten by nearly every possible incarnation he could come up with.
Two armies of 1/2 each have a 33% chance of beating yeu depending on where they were sent for the matchup, three of 1/3rd has 100% chance to win, so on and so forth, generally yeu're not in good shape using such a crappy choice, especially if it's blind luck.
Drop the word problem because this is absolute fail of a word problem. Just go with the raw facts and ask those.
I've only lightly touched on probability so am not sure the exact % chance.
It doesn't matter if they're right. If they can't proove they're right, then they're wrong. No matter how right they may be.
ALL NEW! (As of 24th June) Demo Reel: Quarter 3!
Photo album now new and improved with KITTENS!
And even more albumness since the last one's full
The full Space Monkey Mafia video (as seen in the demo reel)
I have one question that relates to context of this problem.
Let's say we have a game where a game master chooses a number randomly out of 0 to 100. This number is not shown to the other players and the other players also have to choose a number from 0 to 100. Whichever player has the number closest to the game master's number is the winner.
Now let's say we change the number of choices from '0 to 100' to '0 to 200'. And another game is played.
Concerning each game before the players have chosen their numbers, are we assuming that each player has a 50% of winning in each game? Thusly eliminating a finite amount in this case and establishing a safe correlation between the two?
gone
Dude, everything is 50/50. You either win, or you don't. duh.
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.
- Umberto Eco
INTP e9 (sx/so/sp)
Ti = Ne (41.3) > Si (31.2) ~ Ni (31.1) ~ Te (30.1) > Se (24.1) >> Fe (21) & Fi (20.1)
Well I have geometrical solution in mind, but it relies on the answer to my above question being 'yes'.
Essentially you choose a value, going from 0 to 100 and then create a square of your next possible choices for the next two battles for each of these game sequences. Then the opponent goes through each sequence from 0 to 100 for each of your 0 to 100 and you compare the squares and areas.
If the opponent loses the first battle, then they have to win the next two battles, so you only consider the area in its square where both battles have numbers above all possible numbers of the player's square.
If the opponent wins the first battle, then any choices that overlap with the player's square are considered 50/50 and ignored from factoring in winning conditions. The area where the opponent doesn't overlap is divided by 2 and you have the area of that scenario. Now do this for all possibilities and record the total scores, noting the smallest score that the first battle brings and you essentially have your maximum probability. So if one battle is a certain maximum probability then it doesn't matter what you put for the next two battles since they correlate directly and your probability stays the same as long as you choose that maximum probability number for any of the battles. It's hard to explain in text...I wish I had a tablet pc.
gone
From my understanding of the OP, all 3 battles occur concurrently... It's not sequential. So you can't wait for the results of the first battle before setting the remainder of your army for the other 2
4w5, Fi>Ne>Ti>Si>Ni>Fe>Te>Se, sp > so > sx
appreciates being appreciated, conflicted over conflicts, afraid of being afraid, bad at being bad, predictably unpredictable, consistently inconsistent, remarkably unremarkable...
I may not agree with what you are feeling, but I will defend to death your right to have a good cry over it
The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell
Assuming it is indeed a finite number, and assuming the forces are equal size and ability, the randomized one would (most likely) win as that would (most likely) mean an aproximate distribution of 1/3 on each. 1/3 beats 1/4 twice and 1/2 beats 1/3 once. It's quite simple.
I'll supply some answers without going into explanations as of yet. (1/2,1/2,0) has a 50% chance of winning. The (1/2,1/4/,1/4) has a 62.5% chance of winning.
Here's a question. What is the expected value of the largest of three randomly generated numbers between 0 and 100? It isn't the same as the expected value of any one.
Ne > Ti > Si >> Te > Se >> Fe > Fi > Ni
5 so/sp
Chaotic Neutral/Evil