Paradoxes
closed account (N36fSL3A)
I was replying to Mii's reply stating there is a high chance people are related when they mate. (Thats what I was saying)
Adding on to my reply that means everybody who has mated is incestuous.
Adding on to my reply that means everybody who has mated is incestuous.
| Fredbill30 wrote: |
|---|
| high chance people are related when they mate |
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
You said I high chance of people are related. But I was getting at that because you used said "two people".
Looks like you need to take a cold shower. To see such implications in simle statement.
Anyway back (somewhat) to the topic: How do you thin is probability that in class of 25 students there is at least two with birthdays on one day?
Anyway back (somewhat) to the topic: How do you thin is probability that in class of 25 students there is at least two with birthdays on one day?
| LB wrote: |
|---|
| A catch-22 is not always lose-lose for all sides. |
| naraku9333 wrote: |
|---|
| Why should it have to be? I don't remember any situation in the book that would be lose-lose for all sides. |
closed account (N36fSL3A)
Mii there are reasons why I will never take a cold shower in my life. Unless it was boiling temp outside.
| How do you thin is probability that in class of 25 students there is at least two with birthdays on one day? |
I'm too stupid to do the math myself, but guesstimating from the Wikipedia article, it should be over 50%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
http://www.efgh.com/math/birthday.htm
| LB wrote: |
|---|
| You want to not remove the net. |
Surely if you are falling, you would much rather fall into a safe net rather than the hard ground, or am I misinterpreting something you said?
Also, I agree that it is not always negative for all sides, I said that it is always negative for the person with the problem.
| Script Coder wrote: |
|---|
| > You want to not remove the net. Surely if you are falling, you would much rather fall into a safe net rather than the hard ground, or am I misinterpreting something you said? |
Last edited on
<offtopic>
In the situation with someone unable to kill a hospital patient, there isn't really a catch-22 because the killer is not restricted to just unplugging the life-support machine. Plus, the catch-22 would apply to the killer and not the patient because the killer is the one faced with the dilemma.
In the situation with the guy falling toward a net and wire, there is no real catch-22 because not removing the net is not an issue with the guy, and while he is incapable of avoiding the situation, he does not want to avoid it(landing on the net). This may not be a catch-22 also because the guy could land on the net, pushing it down far enough to touch the wire. Thus, he lands on both the net and the wire.
Edit:
Forgot to put down my opinion on win-win vs. lose-lose catch-22's. I find a win-win catch-22 very difficult to believe possible. But hey, if you can provide a reasonable example that could happen in real life, I'll rescind my opinion.
</offtopic>
| Wikipedia wrote: |
|---|
| A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation in which an individual cannot or is incapable of avoiding a problem because of contradictory constraints or rules.[1] Often these situations are such that solving one part of a problem only creates another problem, which ultimately leads back to the original problem. Catch-22s often result from rules, regulations, or procedures that an individual is subject to but has no control over. |
In the situation with someone unable to kill a hospital patient, there isn't really a catch-22 because the killer is not restricted to just unplugging the life-support machine. Plus, the catch-22 would apply to the killer and not the patient because the killer is the one faced with the dilemma.
In the situation with the guy falling toward a net and wire, there is no real catch-22 because not removing the net is not an issue with the guy, and while he is incapable of avoiding the situation, he does not want to avoid it(landing on the net). This may not be a catch-22 also because the guy could land on the net, pushing it down far enough to touch the wire. Thus, he lands on both the net and the wire.
Edit:
Forgot to put down my opinion on win-win vs. lose-lose catch-22's. I find a win-win catch-22 very difficult to believe possible. But hey, if you can provide a reasonable example that could happen in real life, I'll rescind my opinion.
</offtopic>
Last edited on
| Daleth wrote: |
|---|
| I find a win-win catch-22 very difficult to believe possible. |
I mean specifically a catch-22 situation that is a win-win to the persons faced with the situation. A person affected by the outcome of such a catch-22 but is not faced with it does not count.
MONTY HALLS "Lets make a deal" can someone can submit a working code for it tooh :D