Waiting for the gravy at a dinner tableVariation of 100 prisoners light problemThe Security to the Party...
What is better: yes / no radio, or simple checkbox?
What should the omniscient narrator call a character?
Borrowing Characters
Make me a metasequence
How can I create a Table like this in Latex?
Can I become debt free or should I file for bankruptcy? How do I manage my debt and finances?
Is the withholding of funding notice allowed?
Non-Italian European mafias in USA?
Sometimes a banana is just a banana
Roots of 6th chords on the guitar for different inversions/voicings
What is the difference between a forward slip and a side slip?
Why are special aircraft used for the carriers in the United States Navy?
Every subset equal to original set?
Six real numbers so that product of any five is the sixth one
How to mitigate "bandwagon attacking" from players?
Should we avoid writing fiction about historical events without extensive research?
How can I be pwned if I'm not registered on the compromised site?
What's the values for the Freq_Interval column in MSDB.dbo.SysSchedules when Freq_Type is weekly and more than one day is selected in the schedule?
How can atoms be electrically neutral when there is a difference in the positions of the charges?
Is divide-by-zero a security vulnerability?
What does @RC mean in SSDT SQL Server Unit Testing?
What happened to QGIS 2.x LTR?
A bug in Excel? Conditional formatting for marking duplicates also highlights unique value
Called into a meeting and told we are being made redundant (laid off) and "not to share outside". Can I tell my partner?
Waiting for the gravy at a dinner table
Variation of 100 prisoners light problemThe Security to the Party [Part 29]Wine with dinnerThe 169 members of the Dinner ClubCutting the Cheese6, 10, 12, and 15 go out for dinner100 Prisoners' Names in Boxes - Save them all!Ernie and the Optical GyroscopesHelp! I lost my marble(s)!The “Perfect” Lineup
$begingroup$
You are sitting at a round dinner table with $N$ other people (i.e. $N+1$ people all together). One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy boat and pour some on their potatoes. It then gets passed at random to either of the adjacent people ($50%$ each way). This person, after pouring themselves some gravy, also passes it to a neighbour, and as they are so engrossed in conversation it is again equally likely to be either neighbour. This continues, with the gravy boat being passed from person to person in a random direction each time.
You don't want to be the last person to get any gravy. For you to have the smallest probability of being last, which other guest should be the first to use the gravy? And what is that probability?
I don't know the original source of this puzzle, but it has been doing the rounds for a few years and in my opinion it is destined to become a classic. See for example this Math SE question.
mathematics
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are sitting at a round dinner table with $N$ other people (i.e. $N+1$ people all together). One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy boat and pour some on their potatoes. It then gets passed at random to either of the adjacent people ($50%$ each way). This person, after pouring themselves some gravy, also passes it to a neighbour, and as they are so engrossed in conversation it is again equally likely to be either neighbour. This continues, with the gravy boat being passed from person to person in a random direction each time.
You don't want to be the last person to get any gravy. For you to have the smallest probability of being last, which other guest should be the first to use the gravy? And what is that probability?
I don't know the original source of this puzzle, but it has been doing the rounds for a few years and in my opinion it is destined to become a classic. See for example this Math SE question.
mathematics
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are sitting at a round dinner table with $N$ other people (i.e. $N+1$ people all together). One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy boat and pour some on their potatoes. It then gets passed at random to either of the adjacent people ($50%$ each way). This person, after pouring themselves some gravy, also passes it to a neighbour, and as they are so engrossed in conversation it is again equally likely to be either neighbour. This continues, with the gravy boat being passed from person to person in a random direction each time.
You don't want to be the last person to get any gravy. For you to have the smallest probability of being last, which other guest should be the first to use the gravy? And what is that probability?
I don't know the original source of this puzzle, but it has been doing the rounds for a few years and in my opinion it is destined to become a classic. See for example this Math SE question.
mathematics
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
$endgroup$
You are sitting at a round dinner table with $N$ other people (i.e. $N+1$ people all together). One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy boat and pour some on their potatoes. It then gets passed at random to either of the adjacent people ($50%$ each way). This person, after pouring themselves some gravy, also passes it to a neighbour, and as they are so engrossed in conversation it is again equally likely to be either neighbour. This continues, with the gravy boat being passed from person to person in a random direction each time.
You don't want to be the last person to get any gravy. For you to have the smallest probability of being last, which other guest should be the first to use the gravy? And what is that probability?
I don't know the original source of this puzzle, but it has been doing the rounds for a few years and in my opinion it is destined to become a classic. See for example this Math SE question.
mathematics
mathematics
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
edited 23 hours ago
Jaap Scherphuis
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
asked yesterday
Jaap ScherphuisJaap Scherphuis
16k12772
16k12772
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Fascinating.
The probability of being last is $1/N$ regardless of which guest starts with the gravy.
I had to do the calculation with Markov chains to get the answer. But after getting it I thought about it.
It is a certainty that one of your neighbors will get it before you. You can choose that neighbor by sitting next to the first person, or you can wait patiently until one of your neighbors gets it.
From there, to be the last person the gravy needs to go all the way around to your other neighbor without first getting to you. There is some probability that it does this.
But, actually, everyone has the same situation. One of their neighbors will get it and then there is some probability that it goes all the way around from there to your other neighbor without coming back to you through your first neighbor.
Since everyone is in the same situation, the probability of being the last is the same for everyone and so everyone has a $1/n$ chance to be the last person getting the gravy.
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose that your neighbour starts, and call the probability of you being last "x".
Then, suppose that some other person starts.
There is exactly one way for you to be the last one:
* first, the gravy comes to your neighbour
* next, it goes all around the table to your other neighbour.
As we very well know, the first happens
with probability 1
and the second happens
with probability x.
Therefore,
it doesn't matter who starts, and the probability is always the same.
By symmetry
the same applies for all the guests who didn't pick up the gravy
so the probability of it being exactly you who is last is
$frac{1}{text N}$
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "559"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f80243%2fwaiting-for-the-gravy-at-a-dinner-table%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Fascinating.
The probability of being last is $1/N$ regardless of which guest starts with the gravy.
I had to do the calculation with Markov chains to get the answer. But after getting it I thought about it.
It is a certainty that one of your neighbors will get it before you. You can choose that neighbor by sitting next to the first person, or you can wait patiently until one of your neighbors gets it.
From there, to be the last person the gravy needs to go all the way around to your other neighbor without first getting to you. There is some probability that it does this.
But, actually, everyone has the same situation. One of their neighbors will get it and then there is some probability that it goes all the way around from there to your other neighbor without coming back to you through your first neighbor.
Since everyone is in the same situation, the probability of being the last is the same for everyone and so everyone has a $1/n$ chance to be the last person getting the gravy.
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Fascinating.
The probability of being last is $1/N$ regardless of which guest starts with the gravy.
I had to do the calculation with Markov chains to get the answer. But after getting it I thought about it.
It is a certainty that one of your neighbors will get it before you. You can choose that neighbor by sitting next to the first person, or you can wait patiently until one of your neighbors gets it.
From there, to be the last person the gravy needs to go all the way around to your other neighbor without first getting to you. There is some probability that it does this.
But, actually, everyone has the same situation. One of their neighbors will get it and then there is some probability that it goes all the way around from there to your other neighbor without coming back to you through your first neighbor.
Since everyone is in the same situation, the probability of being the last is the same for everyone and so everyone has a $1/n$ chance to be the last person getting the gravy.
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Fascinating.
The probability of being last is $1/N$ regardless of which guest starts with the gravy.
I had to do the calculation with Markov chains to get the answer. But after getting it I thought about it.
It is a certainty that one of your neighbors will get it before you. You can choose that neighbor by sitting next to the first person, or you can wait patiently until one of your neighbors gets it.
From there, to be the last person the gravy needs to go all the way around to your other neighbor without first getting to you. There is some probability that it does this.
But, actually, everyone has the same situation. One of their neighbors will get it and then there is some probability that it goes all the way around from there to your other neighbor without coming back to you through your first neighbor.
Since everyone is in the same situation, the probability of being the last is the same for everyone and so everyone has a $1/n$ chance to be the last person getting the gravy.
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
$endgroup$
Fascinating.
The probability of being last is $1/N$ regardless of which guest starts with the gravy.
I had to do the calculation with Markov chains to get the answer. But after getting it I thought about it.
It is a certainty that one of your neighbors will get it before you. You can choose that neighbor by sitting next to the first person, or you can wait patiently until one of your neighbors gets it.
From there, to be the last person the gravy needs to go all the way around to your other neighbor without first getting to you. There is some probability that it does this.
But, actually, everyone has the same situation. One of their neighbors will get it and then there is some probability that it goes all the way around from there to your other neighbor without coming back to you through your first neighbor.
Since everyone is in the same situation, the probability of being the last is the same for everyone and so everyone has a $1/n$ chance to be the last person getting the gravy.
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
edited yesterday
Adam
181119
181119
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
answered yesterday
Dr XorileDr Xorile
13.4k22572
13.4k22572
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Did you do a lot of calculations before you arrived at that answer? :-)
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
I did - I used Markov chains. I'll write it up, but I'm trying to think of the clever way of getting there which must exist.
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
There is indeed a neat, calculation-free, argument for it.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wow this makes a whole lot of sense. rot13(Gur gnoyr tvirf n snyfr frafr bs cebterff jurer va ernyvgl vgf whfg yvxr lbh ner cnffvat vg qverpgyl gb n enaqbz crefba. Ab jbaqre gur ceboyrz vf cbchyne)
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose that your neighbour starts, and call the probability of you being last "x".
Then, suppose that some other person starts.
There is exactly one way for you to be the last one:
* first, the gravy comes to your neighbour
* next, it goes all around the table to your other neighbour.
As we very well know, the first happens
with probability 1
and the second happens
with probability x.
Therefore,
it doesn't matter who starts, and the probability is always the same.
By symmetry
the same applies for all the guests who didn't pick up the gravy
so the probability of it being exactly you who is last is
$frac{1}{text N}$
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Suppose that your neighbour starts, and call the probability of you being last "x".
Then, suppose that some other person starts.
There is exactly one way for you to be the last one:
* first, the gravy comes to your neighbour
* next, it goes all around the table to your other neighbour.
As we very well know, the first happens
with probability 1
and the second happens
with probability x.
Therefore,
it doesn't matter who starts, and the probability is always the same.
By symmetry
the same applies for all the guests who didn't pick up the gravy
so the probability of it being exactly you who is last is
$frac{1}{text N}$
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Suppose that your neighbour starts, and call the probability of you being last "x".
Then, suppose that some other person starts.
There is exactly one way for you to be the last one:
* first, the gravy comes to your neighbour
* next, it goes all around the table to your other neighbour.
As we very well know, the first happens
with probability 1
and the second happens
with probability x.
Therefore,
it doesn't matter who starts, and the probability is always the same.
By symmetry
the same applies for all the guests who didn't pick up the gravy
so the probability of it being exactly you who is last is
$frac{1}{text N}$
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
$endgroup$
Suppose that your neighbour starts, and call the probability of you being last "x".
Then, suppose that some other person starts.
There is exactly one way for you to be the last one:
* first, the gravy comes to your neighbour
* next, it goes all around the table to your other neighbour.
As we very well know, the first happens
with probability 1
and the second happens
with probability x.
Therefore,
it doesn't matter who starts, and the probability is always the same.
By symmetry
the same applies for all the guests who didn't pick up the gravy
so the probability of it being exactly you who is last is
$frac{1}{text N}$
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
answered yesterday
BassBass
30.3k472186
30.3k472186
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
can you expand on the "therefore" because I just see you restating your assumptions and then concluding something from them that I don't see following.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
$begingroup$
@KateGregory You get the probability of two things both happening by multiplying their individual probabilities together. In this case, that product is x, which, well, is equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Bass
yesterday
2
2
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
$begingroup$
But you said "the chance of it reaching you last is x therefore the chance of it reaching you last is x" -- how is that proving anything? It is the "therefore" part that makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– Kate Gregory
yesterday
1
1
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
I agree with Kate. I get what you are going for however the way you explained it on the surface can sound like you don't understand the conclusion at all. Explain how the gravy inevitably propagates around the table, not the consequence of the propagation. You say the probability of the consequence is 'X' and therefore the consequence of the probability is 'X' so where is the definition of 'X'?
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
1
1
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well of course you say what 'X' is at the beginning however I was referring to how you explain the consequence of event 'X' and the probability of 'X' but never quite 'X'. It is difficult to explain, when you read your answer while already knowing the solution it makes perfect sense but in reality you have a jump in your argument at "therefore" (even although there is no jump in logic) and the reader is forced to make their own conclusion at this point. I don't think it helps that everything is in little pieces, its really just a structure problem.
$endgroup$
– Adam
22 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Puzzling Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f80243%2fwaiting-for-the-gravy-at-a-dinner-table%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
To clarify, for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to just pick up the gravy boat before anyone else does?
$endgroup$
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday
$begingroup$
@MikeTheLiar "One of the other guests is the first to pick up the gravy" and "It then gets passed randomly to either adjacent person" and "which other guest should be first to use the gravy" is sufficient enough to clarify
$endgroup$
– Adam
yesterday
$begingroup$
Is this the way one should organize seating and serving at a party?
$endgroup$
– Try Hard
20 hours ago