Thread 76636535

As of 2025, what is the best routine for recomping? Getting out back into the gym again after a long hiatus but I don't know what the best routine in my case?

>>76636535 (OP)
If you get a gold ball, it could be box 1 or 2. If you get a silver ball, it could be the second or third box. No way to tell which box is which.

uhh, high volume medium intensity compound lifts?

>>76636535 (OP)
combinatorics is so complex. Probabilities and statistics is also not intuitive and requires understanding.
Nobody on this website will know the answer to this question let alone just a simple probabilities question.

>>76636535 (OP)
If you pick a ball at random and it turns out to be gold, there is a 1/3 chance that it came from the gold/silver box and a 2/3 chance that it came from the gold/gold box.

So the probability that you grab a silver ball next is 1/3

>>76636535 (OP)
50%

Presumably there's some weird combinatorics gotcha that factors in that it's more likely to be the 2 gold box than the 1g/1s box because you pulled a gold ball out first, but if you're stopping to ask what is the chance AFTER pulling the first gold ball then in real life I consider it an independent event.

>>76636589
>I consider it an independent event

why? surely the probability of grabbing a silver ball next depends on which box you grabbed the gold ball from.

>>76636589
>but if you're stopping to ask what is the chance AFTER pulling the first gold ball then in real life I consider it an independent event.
and you'd be wrong to do so, because what the other ball is is determined by which box it's in, and it's twice as likely to be the first box as the second one.

>>76636584
Mathematical perspective
>>76636589
Realistic perspective.

Both answers are right in their own point of view. This is one of those questions that are actually flawed. 'think like we taught you' type of question.

>>76636601
>Both answers are right in their own point of view.
Ultimate midwit answer. How the fuck can both be true at the same time?

>>76636584
you are so bad at probabilities, its ridiculous. How does the chance of choosing from one box to another change? You didnt even account the probability of actually selecting a gold ball if you reached into one with a silver one on top of your misunderstanding of probabilities on the boxes together

>>76636605
you're b8ing

>>76636601
You are not right, you have no idea about anything beyond algebra.

>>76636606
Tell me the pigeon hole theory, lets see what you actually know. None of you retards making guesses even referenced this

50/50. You fucking retards realize the box with 2 silver balls is not relevant here right?

>>76636604
Because there are only two boxes to choose a gold ball from. That's a 50/50 probability. You already made the choice to choose one of these two boxes and you no longer have any impact on the odds beyond that first decicion.

>>76636616
>>76636618
Holy kek is /fit/ really this retarded? Maybe hit the library instead of the gym some time

>>76636616
>>76636618
>you have a 50% chance at every situation to choose a silver ball from same box after choosing a first ball
confidently dumb

>>76636622
>>76636630
There's a 100% probability you guys are missing some chromosomes.

>>76636618
>You already made the choice to choose one of these two boxes
Yeah and with what probability did you pick a gold ball from the GG box? And with what probability did you initially pick a gold ball from the the GS box?

>>76636618
How is /fit/ so fucking retarded

>>76636646
it was already predetermined that you picked a gold ball retard.

>>76636653
you are missing the point. you dont know the actual answer without knowing that number first

>>76636653
Obviously, hence my question: with what probability did you pick a gold ball from the GG box? And with what probability did you initially pick a gold ball from the the GS box?

>>76636535 (OP)
There is an answer to this question that you can read the explanation for and you retards guessing 50% would still not understand. Probabilities is not easy

>>76636584
How the fuck can it be 1/3

>>76636673
You have
BOX 1: G1G2
BOX 2: G3S

You have the same probability of picking any gold ball.
If you pick G1 -> guaranteed G2
If you pick G2 -> guaranteed G1
If you pick G3 -> guaranteed S

Thus, 1/3

>>76636695
They're not fungible lmao.
Balls don't have fucking memory of which one you grabbed retard

>>76636705
>get 6000 people to grab a ball
>each ball gets picked by roughly 1000 people
>discard the 3000 that didn't grab a gold ball
>tell the leftover to grab the other ball in the box
How many people of those 3000 leftover grabbed a silver ball?

>>76636761
1500.

>>76636535 (OP)
Probability is 50%. It's either silver or it's not. Mathfags are gay.

Every fucking time.

>>76636659
The bait-framed original problem implies that you have a 100% chance of picking gold from the gold silver box, which is the root cause of the flamer war this ignited

>>76636967
Oh I'm wrong, it does address that by sliding in the "at random", but it's still a reading comprehension/unrealistic premise flame war at heart

>>76636535 (OP)
Is there any reason it wouldn't be 50/50? t.mathlet

>>76637407
Yeah. It's Bertrand's Box Paradox, its meant to intuitively seem like 50/50, but in actuality it's 1/3 in this case.
First is to recognize that "picking a gold ball at random from a box chosen at random" is not 50/50. When you pick a box and select a random ball and its gold, you have twice the probability of having the gold/gold box vs. the gold/silver box (choose GG box: 100% chance of choosing a gold ball. Choose GS box: 50% chance of picking a gold ball). So you have to take into account that probability: the chance of having the GG box is not the same as having the GS box.
Easy way is to write out all possible combinations probability/choices in a decision tree and assigning the probabilities, then add them up as you follow a particular tree down.

>>76637437
It's not a paradox. It's just difficult for retards

>>76636555
It's 50/50
You can't switch choices so the new information that you got doesn't change the odds, it does however tell you it's not the silver-silver box so it's 1 of the remaining 2

If you could switch then maybe there issome Monty Hall problem effect in place but you can't so I'm not even thinling about it

>>76637437
>It's not a paradox
It's technically a viridical paradox, so yes it a paradox (but not in the traditional logic classification of a "true" paradox)

41.67%

>>76637452
>You can't switch choices so the new information that you got doesn't change the odds
Yes it does. Information changes probability, that's how information works in relation to probability theory. It's easy to thought experiment this:
>You can choose between 5 doors, A/B/C/D/E. You are told one door has a prize, the other has nothing. You choose door A. What is the probability that A has the prize?
It's 20%.
>You are told it's not door B. You cannot switch doors. What is the new probability you chose the prize door?
It's now 25%.
And on and on...
>You are told the prize is not behind door B/C/D/E. What's the probability it's the door you chose?
It's 100%.
Information is used to reallocate probability.

>>76636601
>Both answers are right in their own point of view
literally the stupidest thing you could have said

its 2/3 you retards. look up bertrand's paradox

>>76637484
It's 1/3. The OP question switched up the original classical ask.

>>76637484
>can't derive the answer from first principles
>resorts to a shortcut by thinking of an analogous problem
>thereby fucks up

I would hate to be so fucking retard. Can't you think for yourself?

>>76636601
>Both answers are right in their own point of view

10 bucks says you have "school of hard knocks" on your linkedin profile

>>76637460
For it to be a viridical paradox it needs to be some outrageous claim, but really it's just common sense and high school math

>>76637452
my favorite type of retard is the one that brings up the monty hall problem for no reason

>>76636584
This is the right answer and not even professional mathematicians could believe it. Monty hall problem.

>>76636584
/thread, rest of this thread is low iq cope

>>76636761
The fact that there are exactly 0 real world tests in over 130 years of this supposed paradox's existence that support the 2/3 probability idea proves that it is in fact 50/50. It's such a simple and cheap test to do that you could have a statistically significant data set within an afternoon. Instead, mathematicians spend more time setting up rigged computer simulations as "evidence" their entire field isn't worthless masturbation.

>>76636535 (OP)
It's 50% and always has been
To pull a gold ball automatically rules out the third box , the third box doesn't play into the equation

>>76636630
Yes. Because there are only two boxes.

>>76639024
>the third box doesn't play into the equation
Okay, its still 1/3
If you were to reverse the question and ask what is the chance you're pulling out another gold ball, it would be 2/3
So for silver its 1/3

>>76639031
Nope. There are only two boxes so it's 50/50.

Better way to frame it
You have two bundas in front of you. One has a poohole and a vagene and one only has a poohole.
You've already put your pepe into a poohole. What are the odds the bunda you chose also has a vagene you can put your pepe in.

>>76639037
3 gold balls
1 silver ball
You're pulling out 1 gold ball
There is 2 gold balls and 1 silver ball left
The boxes don't matter, you dont know which goldball you pulled so the chance is the same

If you were to conduct this experiment in real life you'd pull the silver ball at 33% chance

>>76639049
See >>76639045

Probability with respect to what? This entire question is just poor phrasing
If you ask, what is the probability across all universes, the answer is 1/3
If you ask, what is the probability across the universes where the gold ball was picked, it's 1/2

>>76639049
>If you were to conduct this experiment in real life you'd pull the silver ball at 33% chance
Cool, so why hasn't a single person ever done the experiment to prove it's 66/33 odds instead of 50/50?

>>76639169
You can literally just set up a simulation in R/python. It will come out to 1/3 on average.

>instantiate 3 lists: A, B, C
>The lists contain the elements GG, GS, SS, respectively
Simulation loop:
>pick list randomly
>pick element randomly
>if gold is picked AND the second element is gold, tabulate 1 for GG
>if gold is picked AND the second element is silver, tabulate one for GS
else, go to beginning of loop
Do it 100k times and, ignoring other scenarios that don't align with the problem statement, you'll get about 1/3 of the remaining runs to GS, and about 2/3 of the runs to GG

>>76636535 (OP)
It’s 2/3.

t. PhD in probability theory

>>76639198
The SS box is irrelevant because the choice of GG and GS isn't by chance, it's already been predetermined the first pick will be from either of the two boxes.

>>76639222
Sure, you can skip that step and start from 2 boxes. I just suggested the full simulation from scratch.

>>76639198
I can also set up a computer simulation that gives 1/2 on average. However the scenario proposed is one set in the real world, not a computer. If the extraordinary claim was true, it would've been proven in the real world sometime in the last 130+ years. Since it hasn't, we must default to the null hypothesis that the probability is 50/50

>>76639235
>I can also set up a computer simulation that gives 1/2 on average.
Describe this simulation

>>76639246
Removing the third box and only having the two boxes because pulling a first gold ball is a given.

>>76639259
This will also give you 1/3.

>>76636535 (OP)
Shit ton of lifting
Shit ton of cardio
1000 calorie deficit
Eat a shit ton of protein

>>76637437
>you pick a box at random and pull out a gold ball
so it's either GG or GS.
>what is the chance to pull a silver ball next?
a had an equal 1/3 chance for it to be either GG or GS (and another 1/3 chance for it to be SS) so it could be either and I can't think of any reason one would be more likely than the other. it's just chance which one you picked.
the question begins after you've already pulled a gold ball. The chance to pick a silver or whatever doesn't matter. the SS box doesn't do anything in this question.
50/50
>t. mathchad

>AFTER LOOKING UP PICREL

I understand. So if i've picked a gold ball, there are 3 possible realities im in. in two of them I picked either G1 or G2 of GG. in the third I picked G from GS. In only one of those timelines I picked the GS box, so I have a 1/3 chance to be in that timeline.

The misunderstanding comes from people who assume there are only two possibilities
>I either picked the GG or GS box when I pulled a ball.
but there are actually 3 possibilities
>I either picked G1 from GG, G2 from GG, or G from GS.
In only one of those possibilities you picked the GS box, so it's 1/3.

I fucking hate probabilities. Thanks for the brain workout OP.

>t. mathchad who's seriously doubting himself

>>76639913
The balls don't exist by themselves so 1/3rd still doesn't work
There are only two boxes so it's always 1/2

I ran a Monte Carlo simulation and the answer was 1/3. What the fuck. This really is a rewording of the Monty Hall problem. I actually thought this was a different situation, where the answer would be 1/2. Here's the code I wrote:

import random

runs = 10**6

not_silver_first_cnt = 0
next_ball_gold_cnt = 0
next_ball_silver_cnt = 0

box_both_gold = 1
box_mixed = 2
box_both_silver = 3

ball_gold = 1
ball_silver = 2

for i in range(runs):
box1 = random.randint(1, 3)

if box1 == box_both_silver:
not_silver_first_cnt += 1
continue

if box1 == box_both_gold:
next_ball_gold_cnt += 1
continue

ball1 = random.randint(1, 2)
if ball1 == ball_silver:
not_silver_first_cnt += 1
else:
next_ball_silver_cnt += 1

valid_runs = runs - not_silver_first_cnt
silver_chance = next_ball_silver_cnt / valid_runs

print(f"{next_ball_silver_cnt}/{valid_runs} = {silver_chance}")

>>76640424
Fucked up the indentation, sorry.

I can't believe this stupid reimagining of the Monty Hall problem is occupying /fit/.

>>76636604
Learn to be more open minded. Two different viewpoints can be "true", for the people that hold the opinions

>>76636535 (OP)
50%

ehm guys what about the routine

>>76641603
The balls are more important right now

>>76636535 (OP)

50%.

Also, start with calisthenics then gradually work in weights

>>76640424
>>76640430
"""random""" is anything but for a computer. you need real world data for any kind of proof