Quote:
Originally Posted by SiberianPIMP
The difference with Parrondo's paradox is that the game itself changes between wagers. That's not what the repeated coinflip problem is.
Ironically, you want to believe that there's something Parrodo's paradox, which is based entirely on probability theory, while simultaneously thinking that there's something inherently wrong with probability theory.
Furthermore, there *are* philosophical questions surrounding randomness. But those are philosophical and not mathematical. So if you want to come at it with a problem, you're going to have to raise philosophical objections and not mathematical ones.
Ultimately, you're in a position where you can believe whatever you want. Distrust probability calculations even though it has been thoroughly tested both empirically and theoretically for a few hundred years. Whatever. It's all in your head anyway.