<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>The surprise examination or unexpected hanging paradox · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9903160/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9903160/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>The surprise examination or unexpected hanging paradox — mentioned by robinhouston</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43764344</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:math_9903160:43764344</guid><pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:17:20 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I would encourage anyone who&amp;#x27;s intrigued by this paradox to read Timothy Chow&amp;#x27;s comprehensive paper on the subject (https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9903160). In particular, he discusses what he calls the meta-paradox: &amp;gt; The meta-paradox consists of two seemingly incompatible facts. The first is that the surprise exam paradox seems easy to resolve. Those seeing it for the first time typically have the instinctive reaction that the flaw in the students’ reasoning is obvious. Furthermore, most readers who have tried to think it through have had little difficulty resolving it to their own…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9903160/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.LO</category></item></channel></rss>
