To me, it only changes if I understand why the door is being opened. These doors do not contain Schrödinger's car. both doors start out at 1/3 and drop to 1/2. Unless the host is attempting to sway me. In short, it depends on if the second choice is real, or a red haring. Which is not explicitly stated. (See direct calculations section)

The logic of the Pigeon switching also seems false. As The thinking of the pigeon is to continue choosing after failing, as it is not going to choose the same door twice, if it knows it needs to make a new choice.

In addition, it feels like I am being told to accept an absurdity, as a new base logic. And after learning of this on the front page of reddit, I do not trust this to be a truthful logic. It seems they are skewing the base logic by, concealing a fundamental rule that changes the results.

To me, it only changes if I understand why the door is being opened. These doors do not contain Schrödinger's car. both doors start out at 1/3 and drop to 1/2. Unless the host is attempting to sway me. In short, it depends on if the second choice is real, or a red haring. Which is not explicitly stated. (See direct calculations section)

The logic of the Pigeon switching also seems false. As The thinking of the pigeon is to continue choosing after failing, as it is not going to choose the same door twice, if it knows it needs to make a new choice.

In addition, it feels like I am being told to accept and absurdity, as a new base logic. And after learning of this on the front page of reddit, I do not trust this to be a truthful logic. It seems they are skewing the base logic by, concealing a fundamental rule that changes the results.