Polya Urn Simulation
observablehq.com
observablehq.com
It's interesting that they don't.
Normal distribution would be extremely weird and unexpected (and not even really possible): we know for sure that the proportion in the end has to be between 0% to 100%. Normal distributions don't have such cutoffs.
The log-odds scale also makes it clear why probabilities 0 and 1 are very special: they only show up as limits in the log-odds scale.
But the problem is symmetric, and even if pick a red, you end up with two reds and one blue, so not so much imbalanced.
And even if the mix becomes really imbalanced, say 7 red and one blue, picking the rarest color will have more effect than picking the most common one. So you could consider that the system tries to balance itself naturally, hence avoiding huge swings in some direction or the other.
As you say, the way in which new balls are added tends to push the proportion towards the extremes.
The uniform distribution is the result of these two tendencies exactly cancelling out.
Urn models are engineered to have a rich get richer bias which is best seen by varying the initial populations.
Instead of offering trial count and pick counts which are (invariates in the actual model) he could have picked initial ball count and initial white/red ratio.
Is it true that a sample of the random process is convergent with probability 1?
Isn’t the more enticing question how strong the bias towards the first picked Color is?
After two picks, you have three cases. If you picked two different colored balls, the distribution should be a uniform distribution again, just like the initial state. The two other distribution should mirror eachother, and thus be linear again.
Maybe that something interesting happens with three picks. Or maybe, you always end up with linear distributions with tilted slopes. In that case it is rather boring.