Can you solve the cheating royal riddle? - Dan Katz
video description
Date: 2020-08-22
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Roberto
Let me suggest a related riddle.
Imagine you are now one of the king's children. Your father's chief advisor explained you the rules of the game just before you jumped in the royal rolling room. Now, as the door secures behind you, you start thinking. You have always been excellent in mathematics and you have already shown great capacities in governing a country, but never been the luckiest among your brothers and sisters. After all, you know that you are the one really deserving the throne, even if this means that you should cheat a bit today.
So, instead of rolling your dice, you grab pencil and paper and do all the required calculations.
Just as the time is over, you take your final piece of paper and write on it the highest possible number that will prevent you being disqualified.
Which is such number?
reply
Let me suggest a related riddle.
Imagine you are now one of the king's children. Your father's chief advisor explained you the rules of the game just before you jumped in the royal rolling room. Now, as the door secures behind you, you start thinking. You have always been excellent in mathematics and you have already shown great capacities in governing a country, but never been the luckiest among your brothers and sisters. After all, you know that you are the one really deserving the throne, even if this means that you should cheat a bit today.
So, instead of rolling your dice, you grab pencil and paper and do all the required calculations.
Just as the time is over, you take your final piece of paper and write on it the highest possible number that will prevent you being disqualified.
Which is such number?
reply
Setteduetto
By the same logic that Cassandra was disqualified by, EVERYONE should be disqualified. It's a logical fallacy.
Let's say I had a six sided die and rolled it three times. I rolled a 14. The odds of rolling a 14 is only 7%! So clearly I'm lying!
Except no. The probability of rolling a 14 has no bearing on the probability of LYING about rolling a 14. You can't calculate that probability without knowing more about the situation.
This is called the Fallacy of Backward Probability Calculation.
reply
By the same logic that Cassandra was disqualified by, EVERYONE should be disqualified. It's a logical fallacy.
Let's say I had a six sided die and rolled it three times. I rolled a 14. The odds of rolling a 14 is only 7%! So clearly I'm lying!
Except no. The probability of rolling a 14 has no bearing on the probability of LYING about rolling a 14. You can't calculate that probability without knowing more about the situation.
This is called the Fallacy of Backward Probability Calculation.
reply
Topher
It was wrong to disqualify Cassandra without proof. There was a civil war between Alexa's followers and Cassandra's. Millions of people in Pi were killed in that war. It will take 100s of years for their economy to recover. Among the people killed were those who, had they lived, would have cured all known diseases and found free abundant non-polluting energy. I hope you feel great.
reply
It was wrong to disqualify Cassandra without proof. There was a civil war between Alexa's followers and Cassandra's. Millions of people in Pi were killed in that war. It will take 100s of years for their economy to recover. Among the people killed were those who, had they lived, would have cured all known diseases and found free abundant non-polluting energy. I hope you feel great.
reply
Eric
The mathematician in me is twitching because the chance of (1 / 7. 5 billion)2 isn; t the chance of picking someone who turns out to be Paul Rudd, and then randomly picking him again; but it is the chance that, if you decided you wanted to pick Paul Rudd, doing so by chance twice in a row. The difference is in DECIDING it's Paul Rudd you want, before you pick the first time.
reply
The mathematician in me is twitching because the chance of (1 / 7. 5 billion)2 isn; t the chance of picking someone who turns out to be Paul Rudd, and then randomly picking him again; but it is the chance that, if you decided you wanted to pick Paul Rudd, doing so by chance twice in a row. The difference is in DECIDING it's Paul Rudd you want, before you pick the first time.
reply
Dylan
Disqualify Bertram and Draco because they're dumbasses that clearly cheated. You can't disqualify Cassandra since you have 0 proof she cheated. Therefore you either pick Cassandra or make her and Alexa do it again till one is disqualified and you have a winner.
If this were reality however you'd pick whatever one offered you the biggest bribe
reply
Disqualify Bertram and Draco because they're dumbasses that clearly cheated. You can't disqualify Cassandra since you have 0 proof she cheated. Therefore you either pick Cassandra or make her and Alexa do it again till one is disqualified and you have a winner.
If this were reality however you'd pick whatever one offered you the biggest bribe
reply
Mr.
Dammit! I went with D because I didn't realize they were multiples of 5. I knew you were being sneaky with all the weird numbers on the dice, but I thought with the other two being obvious it would come down to a 1v1. Plus draco's seemed close enough to the median. I'm mad
reply
Dammit! I went with D because I didn't realize they were multiples of 5. I knew you were being sneaky with all the weird numbers on the dice, but I thought with the other two being obvious it would come down to a 1v1. Plus draco's seemed close enough to the median. I'm mad
reply
Felix
First dude obviously thought outside the box: he read the 18 upside down so it would be 81. He rolled it 5 times and 5 times a 12 on the other die which brings the total to 465. The other 15 throws would pairwise sum up to 25. Tada, 840.
reply
First dude obviously thought outside the box: he read the 18 upside down so it would be 81. He rolled it 5 times and 5 times a 12 on the other die which brings the total to 465. The other 15 throws would pairwise sum up to 25. Tada, 840.
reply
SuBha
Bull. If Smart, Honest and Luckiest then 700 is still possible. You canNOT just disagree because of probability.
If a person can increase 72Billion in 6 month which used to be wealth of Richest person on the planet.
reply
Bull. If Smart, Honest and Luckiest then 700 is still possible. You canNOT just disagree because of probability.
If a person can increase 72Billion in 6 month which used to be wealth of Richest person on the planet.
reply
tola
Sholdnt the chances for a perfect 700 score be 1/3 to the 40th?
After all, thee are two sides on each cube that adds up to the max option of 35, making it a 1/3 chance to roll what you need for a highest number
reply
Sholdnt the chances for a perfect 700 score be 1/3 to the 40th?
After all, thee are two sides on each cube that adds up to the max option of 35, making it a 1/3 chance to roll what you need for a highest number
reply
ReaSeBy
Okay I dont know much statistics, but using what I know, I got that the best possible score is 445, is this right? (best possible means maximizing the chance to become selected)
reply
Okay I dont know much statistics, but using what I know, I got that the best possible score is 445, is this right? (best possible means maximizing the chance to become selected)
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
