Scientific Applications of the Trolley Problem

What are some good uses of the classic "trolley problem" to teach some advanced scientific/mathematical concepts, Veeky Forums?

...

>pull lever
>trolley superpositions into A and B at the same time
>kill all 10
>but they were communists so it's ok

...

Haven't seen this one before.

Yes I would switch levers.

This is the classic Monty Hall problem.
Probability of choosing the right lever is affected by the new information, in favour of switching levels.

Levers being A, B, C
Initially chosen lever being A
P(A is the right lever) = 1/3
P(BnC has the right lever) = 2/3
P(B is the right lever / C is not) = 2/3

...

...

Why is pulling the lever suppose to be better in this case?

The trolley will be going really fast, so it'll probably flip off the track once it hits someone.

Expected outcome for pulling lever is 5, same as not pulling lever.

0.5*9 + 0.5*1 = 5

I god damn love this thread. Moar.

Is there a solution to this?

...

I thought I would add this image to this incredibly important thread.

Disregarding the information in the last paragraph : The Left track.

Including the last paragraph : Impossible with the information given to make an objectively desirable choice.

If you switch it again as trolley is passing you fuck up the railorad, trolley, but everybody survives.

This is a tough one. I'd try waggling the lever back and forth in an attempt to induce multi-track drifting, if that doesn't work then I guess I have a lot of work to do murdering whoever doesn't get hit by the train.

fixed

This is the funniest one I've ever read

The answer is who gives a fuck, you can't know.

fixed

that's not something that always happens. I fixed it properly the first time.

1 is the solution.
The predictor has already set up your track as well as the next track. Your choice at that point has no effect whether the people are in the box or not.
What you choose in that scenario has no effect on what the predictor had previously expected you to do.

Thumbnail looks kinda like boobs...

no you choose 2 because then you only kill 1 person instead of 5.

...

You didn't fix anything. The positive feedback loop exists, even though it's not a perpetuum mobile and there are other relevant factors that eventually kill its effect. Your dumb debunking amounted to dropping the arrow between "overall level of panic" and "number of cattle running" and pretending it's not there.

>city boys

>no one posted the best trolley version

...

...

Note that the predictor could've predicted that you would deviate from original choice on purpose, or that you would choose at random. All of this would mean 5 ppl in the opaque box.

Moreover, if the predictor valued accuracy, and you (if the experiment is repeatable) or people before you consistently picked not to go through transparent box, then over time there will be no bodies placed in the opaque box.

I like the pic that has the trolley drifting along both tracks and kills both sets of people

Because the cardinality of aleph 1 is greater than any set with a bijection to aleph 0.

Wrong. This question says one of the other levers is always fake. Therefore, there is a 50/50 chance the one you originally choose is real.

No. The other user is right. You have already made your choice, THEN it is revealed that the one of the remaining two is wrong. Your original probability of choosing the correct one is still 1/3.

Guys PLEASE

If ANYONE has the trolley image with difference probabilities of death and different number of people on the tracks, please post it here!

Thanks.

Is this the one

I have the answer.

Albert and Bernard both know that Cheryl told them a letter or number. Albert got a letter, Bernard got a number.

Albert knows that Bernard does not know the pad, because his letter is either C or D. If it was A or B, there is a chance that Bernard might know the pad if his number was 5 or 6 (since there is only one blue pad on that line). Since he knows Bernard doesn't know, his letter must be C or D.

Bernard now knows that Albert is either on C or D. And he says that he NOW knows the pad. So Bernard must be on 2, 3, or 4. He couldn't have been on 5 or 6 because then he would have already known the pad. And he's not on 1 because knowing that Albert is C or D doesn't narrow the choice down.

Albert now says that he knows the location of the pad, since he now know that Bernard's number was not 1, 5 or 6. For him to know the pad now, he must have been able to choose unambiguously from all the possible pads on his line. If he was on D, he wouldn't be able to know that just based on the information that Bernard is not on 1, 5 or 6, because he might be on 2 OR 4. So it must be C. C3.

Yes, thank you!

In 100 repeated rounds, you can expect around 85 people to die on the first track.

For the second track, in 100 rounds you can expect around 25+25+25+25+25 = 125 people to die.

The 15% option is better.

You are wrong. The monty hall problem is a well documented mathematical probability problem. It boils down to the fact that monty knows which one is the right lever. You have exactly a 1/3 chance to randomly guess it. Upon guessing monty reveals which one it absolutely ISNT. By doing so he has indirectly given you information about which is the correct one. Switching mathematically does increase your odds, This is not up for debate, its been proven many times over.

>25+25+25+25+25 = 125
kek

What are you keking about, brainlet?

You're retarded. 25*5 is 125. I'm going to record this so your stupidity is exposed even if you come back to delete your post.

Do you like MY TRAIN