What are the odds of a couple's second child being a boy?
Comments
-
Fuck that, this question on the Wiki page gets into Bayesian theory and if I understood that properly then bye bye current job and hello to high stakes poker in Monte Carlo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox#Bayesian_analysis1 -
I got one - If a cowboy rides into town on a Tuesday and stays for 2 nights, how can he also leave on a Tuesday?
No cheating0 -
Name of the horse?i_b_b_o_r_g said:I got one - If a cowboy rides into town on a Tuesday and stays for 2 nights, how can he also leave on a Tuesday?
No cheating1 -
lol Olduns are the best1
-
These quizy threads are giving me the urge to do a Whose Rack?1
-
Chizz has edited the original question, meaning the first 50 posts look totally wrong now anyway. Poor form.
I'm going to start a thread asking "Should Roland sell the club" then when everyone has posted "YES OH GOD YES" I will change the question to "Should the Brexit thread be reopened?"4 -
OK here's another conundrum.
You are standing at a tram points by a bungalow. An out-of-control tram is coming towards the points where it will hit a family of four stuck on the tracks. The family will be spared if you change the points, but it will instead hit a lone person walking up the tracks. If you do this, the tram will then hit a door, revealing a goat. A man will then tell you that behind two other doors is another goat and a Ferrari. In the Ferrari there are a large number of unpaired socks of five different designs. By the time you are told all of this, it is too late to save the family from a tram coming in the opposite direction. What colour were the stairs?2 -
Non Binary?Fiiish said:OK here's another conundrum.
You are standing at a tram points by a bungalow. An out-of-control tram is coming towards the points where it will hit a family of four stuck on the tracks. The family will be spared if you change the points, but it will instead hit a lone person walking up the tracks. If you do this, the tram will then hit a door, revealing a goat. A man will then tell you that behind two other doors is another goat and a Ferrari. In the Ferrari there are a large number of unpaired socks of five different designs. By the time you are told all of this, it is too late to save the family from a tram coming in the opposite direction. What colour were the stairs?0 -
Bungalow.Fiiish said:OK here's another conundrum.
You are standing at a tram points by a bungalow. An out-of-control tram is coming towards the points where it will hit a family of four stuck on the tracks. The family will be spared if you change the points, but it will instead hit a lone person walking up the tracks. If you do this, the tram will then hit a door, revealing a goat. A man will then tell you that behind two other doors is another goat and a Ferrari. In the Ferrari there are a large number of unpaired socks of five different designs. By the time you are told all of this, it is too late to save the family from a tram coming in the opposite direction. What colour were the stairs?0 -
How many elephants can you fit in a Mini?0
- Sponsored links:
-
Depends how thinly you slice them.i_b_b_o_r_g said:How many elephants can you fit in a Mini?
0 -
The very first answer was correctlordromford said:
Yeah. An hour and a half after me. And after you changed the question.Chizz said:
@Dazzler21 has spelt it out precisely and accurately.PaddyP17 said:@Chizz
You seem to think it's 33%. Why?
You're employing the gambler's fallacy, that outcome B is contingent on outcome A (i.e. the roulette wheel was red that spin, so it's more likely to be black this time).
It's not the case, and biologically speaking, is generally 50/50 as to whether a kid is a boy or girl, regardless of gender of previous child.
There are four, equally-likely scenarios for people having two children. The fact that one is a boy disqualifies one of those four, leaving three, equally-likely scenarios. It can be 1. Boy-Boy, 2. Boy-Girl or 3. Girl-Boy.
So there are twice as many scenarios in which the "other" child is a girl. Hence, 33%.0 -
Isn't Burlington Bertie 'hundred to thirty'?Henry Irving said:
The very first answer was correctlordromford said:
Yeah. An hour and a half after me. And after you changed the question.Chizz said:
@Dazzler21 has spelt it out precisely and accurately.PaddyP17 said:@Chizz
You seem to think it's 33%. Why?
You're employing the gambler's fallacy, that outcome B is contingent on outcome A (i.e. the roulette wheel was red that spin, so it's more likely to be black this time).
It's not the case, and biologically speaking, is generally 50/50 as to whether a kid is a boy or girl, regardless of gender of previous child.
There are four, equally-likely scenarios for people having two children. The fact that one is a boy disqualifies one of those four, leaving three, equally-likely scenarios. It can be 1. Boy-Boy, 2. Boy-Girl or 3. Girl-Boy.
So there are twice as many scenarios in which the "other" child is a girl. Hence, 33%.
Also, the wording of the OP was different then...0 -
Chelsea play in Fulham0
-
He kept changing it but the first answer was still rightlordromford said:
Isn't Burlington Bertie 'hundred to thirty'?Henry Irving said:
The very first answer was correctlordromford said:
Yeah. An hour and a half after me. And after you changed the question.Chizz said:
@Dazzler21 has spelt it out precisely and accurately.PaddyP17 said:@Chizz
You seem to think it's 33%. Why?
You're employing the gambler's fallacy, that outcome B is contingent on outcome A (i.e. the roulette wheel was red that spin, so it's more likely to be black this time).
It's not the case, and biologically speaking, is generally 50/50 as to whether a kid is a boy or girl, regardless of gender of previous child.
There are four, equally-likely scenarios for people having two children. The fact that one is a boy disqualifies one of those four, leaving three, equally-likely scenarios. It can be 1. Boy-Boy, 2. Boy-Girl or 3. Girl-Boy.
So there are twice as many scenarios in which the "other" child is a girl. Hence, 33%.
Also, the wording of the OP was different then...0 -
How is hundred to thirty correct?0
-
Close enough. I took it to mean 1/3lordromford said:How is hundred to thirty correct?
0 -
Haha!Henry Irving said:
Close enough. I took it to mean 1/3lordromford said:How is hundred to thirty correct?
No. If your probability in a two horse race is 1/3, then your theoretical odds would be 2 to 1. 100-30 is 3 and a bit to one which equates to a probability of about 23%. So not even close.0 -
Pregnant patience?i_b_b_o_r_g said:In a week when the BMA have advised their members not to refer to their pregnant patience as 'expectant mothers' and to use instead the more socially acceptable term 'pregnant people', I find this thread highly inappropriate and deeply offensive on so many levels.
Disappointed, France.0