Assume there is a Michael, who on race day was mysteriously cloned 4 times in a perfect manner such that biologically and psychologically they are a perfect copy to the original. So there are now 4 Michaels plus one proto Michael.
Now they are put to a 100m race on a standard race track. Assume that the universe has normal randomness in wind and temperature variation. What is the probability that proto Michael wins the race?
Still not enough info. The race is legally a tie if the times are within a certain (I think a millisecond) interval, and with runners this similar in ability, the probability that nobody wins is non-zero.
The randomness in the air molecules are enough to case minor variation in finish timings.
I think I should add that the observer can see the finish line with an accuracy of one Planck length and that observation uses a mysterious method which avoids Heisenburgs uncertainty principle. That should make the question well-defined 😆
That’s actually the best possible answer as it’s a deeply stupid question. To many uncontrolled variables for a simple probability question.
Who are the other runners? If it’s Usain Bolt vs. a 4th grader, the probability of the 4th grader winning approaches zero.
This fall, on Fox… Are You Faster than a 4th Grader?
Assume there is a Michael, who on race day was mysteriously cloned 4 times in a perfect manner such that biologically and psychologically they are a perfect copy to the original. So there are now 4 Michaels plus one proto Michael.
Now they are put to a 100m race on a standard race track. Assume that the universe has normal randomness in wind and temperature variation. What is the probability that proto Michael wins the race?
Still not enough info. The race is legally a tie if the times are within a certain (I think a millisecond) interval, and with runners this similar in ability, the probability that nobody wins is non-zero.
The randomness in the air molecules are enough to case minor variation in finish timings. I think I should add that the observer can see the finish line with an accuracy of one Planck length and that observation uses a mysterious method which avoids Heisenburgs uncertainty principle. That should make the question well-defined 😆
10%. With exact clones it would be 0%, a draw. But with random influences, either of them has a 50% chance.
And /s if i’m wrong.
THANK YOU. So much better.
It’s still 50/50, he either wins or he doesn’t 😁 😂.