The goalposts here are different from a normal "paradox".
The actual solution is explained right there on the page, the expectation for both envelopes (one has x, one has 2x) is x*3/2, so switching changes nothing.
The "solution" demanded is supposed to be pointing out the specific logical error in the erroneous calculation that says switching should win. Citing the correct logic is not considered sufficient.
The actual solution is explained right there on the page, the expectation for both envelopes (one has x, one has 2x) is x*3/2, so switching changes nothing.
The "solution" demanded is supposed to be pointing out the specific logical error in the erroneous calculation that says switching should win. Citing the correct logic is not considered sufficient.