Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #26 20130622 06:45:58
Re: Little question (Probability)could you show me in details my error pls ? #27 20130622 06:49:55
Re: Little question (Probability)You are correct here, all three hitting: In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #28 20130622 07:01:54
Re: Little question (Probability)Ok, must I see it that that way #29 20130622 07:05:24
Re: Little question (Probability)Here is how to see it. If you tree these that is when you see the errors quickly. I will give you another approach h means hit and m means miss. There are 3 2 hits and 1 miss. Do you see them? For instance Tom hits, Alice hits and Julie misses. To get the probability for that just fill in Tom = h = .4 Alice = h = .3 Julie = m = .2 .4*.3*.2 = .024 You do the other 2 and add them up In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #30 20130622 07:15:31
Re: Little question (Probability)AH......... ok, Sh... I should have done a drawing to help me see it. Ok, now, I know how to finish do it. #31 20130622 07:19:01
Re: Little question (Probability)Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #32 20130622 07:20:39
Re: Little question (Probability)YEs, I've included the m's in the equation above. ALso, I got 0,392 for two persons hitting ! #33 20130622 07:22:41
Re: Little question (Probability)Very good! These problems can be tricky. I got the wrong answer too. You have to be careful. Now you can figure out 0,1,2,3 easily.] In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #34 20130622 07:23:48
Re: Little question (Probability)Ok, bye and thank you again. If it happens again, I'll remember to do a drawing like yours ! #35 20130622 16:33:33
Re: Little question (Probability)Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #36 20130715 19:31:21
Re: Little question (Probability)I have just had a bit of look at these particular posts regarding "A little question on Probability". I was on the understanding that this forum was for Maths is Fun for Kids from Kindergarten to Year 12, just looking at these particular posts I don't se how this forum would assist me if I was to ask about "Probability  Chance and Data"  for Kids #37 20130715 20:46:29
Re: Little question (Probability)Hi Angie Pop;
Hmmm, might be worth a shot to post your question and see what the tooth fairy brings. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #38 20130715 21:45:29
Re: Little question (Probability)That is a fair response, quite amazed at what I looked at in previous posts, is all, the course that I am doing is for Kids in Early Primary to Mid School and Upper Primary, just looking at the Maths is Fun website, seems more simplistic #39 20130715 22:01:26
Re: Little question (Probability)Hi;
I never thought I would get a chance to use that quote from "The Empire Strikes Back!" In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. 