(New page: For problem 2 I think a) [i] P(one lost on A,one lost on B)=2!(1/5)(1-1/5)(1/16) [ii] P(both lost on B)=[(1-1/5)^2]*(1/16) [iii] P(both lost on A)=(1/5)^2 I don't really understand...)
 
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
For problem 2
 
For problem 2
 
I think
 
I think
a) [i] P(one lost on A,one lost on B)=2!(1/5)(1-1/5)(1/16)
+
a)
  [ii] P(both lost on B)=[(1-1/5)^2]*(1/16)
+
  [iii] P(both lost on A)=(1/5)^2
+
(i) P(one lost on A,one lost on B)=2!(1/5)(1-1/5)(1/16)
 +
 
 +
(ii) P(both lost on B)=[(1-1/5)^2]*(1/16)
 +
 
 +
(iii) P(both lost on A)=(1/5)^2
  
  
 
I don't really understand the solutiong they give, but i dont really think the solution for a)[ii] is correct. The P for one case lost in B is 1/16, how can lost both in B even higher than lost one?
 
I don't really understand the solutiong they give, but i dont really think the solution for a)[ii] is correct. The P for one case lost in B is 1/16, how can lost both in B even higher than lost one?

Latest revision as of 15:51, 24 September 2008

For problem 2 I think a)

(i) P(one lost on A,one lost on B)=2!(1/5)(1-1/5)(1/16)

(ii) P(both lost on B)=[(1-1/5)^2]*(1/16)

(iii) P(both lost on A)=(1/5)^2


I don't really understand the solutiong they give, but i dont really think the solution for a)[ii] is correct. The P for one case lost in B is 1/16, how can lost both in B even higher than lost one?

Alumni Liaison

Abstract algebra continues the conceptual developments of linear algebra, on an even grander scale.

Dr. Paul Garrett