not sure of the accuracy: http://www.witnessesonline.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/witnessesonline/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=000129
The numbers look like they might be correct.
The WOL poster interestingly enough left out reporting any of the disService Year 2000 figures that were higher than the corresponding 2001 figures.
Baptisms: 2000: 288,907 (left out of WOL report)
Baptisms: 2001: 263,431 (decline of 25,476 or 8.81 percent)
Also of note: the average congregation size, already small, is getting smaller.
Congregation size: 2000: 65.97182
Congregation size: 2001: 65.67261
aaaarrgh... i finally got the guts to tell my mom yesterday i wouldn't be attending any more meetings.
of course, i had my reasons all laid out (going to the meetings would be hypocrite of my part, etc.
) but, surprisingly, she didn't ask for any reason.
Hello mindfield:
I suggest that you respect your mother's wishes in this matter and no longer use her house, her computer, and her Internet connection to access any site that is in her disfavor.
What you should do is to somehow get your own place, computer, and connection to do your browsing. Most public libraries have Internet connections for use, and public Internet access can be found at various colleges and commercial establishments.
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
Hello willy_think:
Would, in your view, anything change if the goal were re-stated as "maximizing the amount of cash you can take home"?. (Instead of "maximizing the amount of cash you can take out of he room".)
I don't see any real difference. The statement of the goal was not intended as a trick.
If there is a trick in the description, then I'd say it was the sentence:
"The contents are fixed BEFORE you make your choice."
--------
Hello All:
I just did a web search and found well over a hundred references to the problem. There is no consensus of conclusions.
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
Hello willy_think:
Imagine that you are walking down a city street and you come across a building where the experiment is taking place. There is a very long line of people waiting to go in the entrance to participate. (This is not surprising as a free US$5,000 is guaranteed for anyone who grabs both boxes.) Next to the entrance there is the exit from the building where people who have just participated are on their way home.
Of the hundreds of persons exiting the building, as far as you can tell, everyone who had picked Box A only has a million dollars and each feels that they "won" and have maximized their cash return. Also, as far as you can tell, everyone who picked both boxes is going away with only five thousand.
Which of the two classes of participants has most successfully maximized their results?
-----------
Perhaps there is a rough parallel with the creation account of Genesis. The forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil corresponds to Box B (US$5,000) while the potential of spending immortal bliss in the rest of the Garden is represented by Box A (US$1,000,000).
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
Is there anyone out there who would take both boxes?
If you knew beforehand that the experimentor was beyond all doubt totally infallible, would this make a difference?
If you were to take Box A only, and by some unimaginable chance it was EMPTY, would you consider that evidence for the existence of free will?
what do the following thirteen posters have in common?.
ashitaka.
dim.
I don't see any new biographies yet.
Maybe I'll just have to start making up some really juicy fables and send them in.
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
The score so far:
Skimmer takes Box A and gets a million dollars. He buys a luxurious beach house by the Lake of Everlasting Fire and spends all day drinking scotch and water while watching
Naeblis, who took both boxes, got five thousand, and is currently swimming in molten lava, while
msil is at a bookstore trading in his statistics textbooks (knows them already and doesn't need them anymore) and spending his million from picking Box A buying theology books to re-stock his personal library.
what do the following thirteen posters have in common?.
ashitaka.
dim.
I think I will try the same puzzle again in a few months with fresh data. All of you who have read this thread have to promise not to give away the answer.
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
Hey Naeblis, I didn't know you had an asbestos swimsuit!
newcomb's paradox.
years ago, the periodical _scientific american_ had a regular column titled "mathematical games" authored by martin gardner.
the topics ranged from the frivolous to the profound, and one of the columns that generated a great deal of feedback was the one on what is known as "newcomb's paradox".
Further data:
1. If you try something funny like a coin toss, peeking into Box A, selling your choice to the higher bidder, or just grabbing Box B, you will be hit by lighting and then attacked by love-starved hamsters.
2. If you refuse to make a choice in a timely manner, then a random selection of three of the seven Plagues of Ancient Egypt will fall upon you and your family.
3. Attempts to cajole, bribe, or threaten the experimentor may result in a permanent vacation in the Lake of Everlasting Fire.
