tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15628310.post4124592030817972029..comments2024-02-11T22:40:20.959-05:00Comments on Question of the day: Flawed Nobel PrizeAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18153935609499338685noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15628310.post-11511200518682844672008-01-07T10:34:00.000-05:002008-01-07T10:34:00.000-05:00Anonymous got it right, as long as you assume winn...Anonymous got it right, as long as you assume winning the second time is independent of winning the first time. <BR/><BR/>I still think the joke is funny, though.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18153935609499338685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15628310.post-25860677770761994702008-01-03T13:02:00.000-05:002008-01-03T13:02:00.000-05:00The flaw is that he is assuming that the only peop...The flaw is that he is assuming that the only people eligible for the award when he received his 2nd were the previous winners. If he were only in competition with the other winners, then he would be correct, but I think that he probably was in competition with the whole world, thus making the likelihood of winning a second time 1/1000000000 X 1/1000000000 (or really, really small)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com