Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °
| |
|
|
You are not logged in. #1 2006-02-28 15:50:12
Probability and StatisticsPS # 1 Character is who you are when no one is looking. #2 2006-03-01 03:15:56
Re: Probability and StatisticsPS # 1 Why did the vector cross the road? It wanted to be normal. #3 2006-03-01 03:41:45
Re: Probability and StatisticsVery good, mathsyperson. You're correct. Character is who you are when no one is looking. #4 2006-03-01 19:08:07
Re: Probability and StatisticsPS # 2 Character is who you are when no one is looking. #5 2006-03-02 02:47:18
Re: Probability and StatisticsOoh, interesting. Let's see... a chessboard has 4 corner squares, 24 edge squares and 36 centre squares. Why did the vector cross the road? It wanted to be normal. #6 2006-03-02 02:58:37
Re: Probability and StatisticsExcellent! Well done, mathsyperson! Character is who you are when no one is looking. #7 2006-03-02 15:19:11
Re: Probability and StatisticsPS # 3 Character is who you are when no one is looking. #8 2006-03-03 03:31:26
Re: Probability and StatisticsP(AnB) = P(A) + P(B) - P(AuB). Why did the vector cross the road? It wanted to be normal. #9 2006-03-03 15:43:36
Re: Probability and Statistics
mathsyperson, did you notice that? Character is who you are when no one is looking. #10 2006-03-09 15:17:05
Re: Probability and StatisticsPS # 4 Character is who you are when no one is looking. #11 2006-03-10 04:01:25
Re: Probability and StatisticsOh, silly me. I hate it when I make stupid mistakes from not reading the question properly. Ah well. Why did the vector cross the road? It wanted to be normal. #12 2006-03-10 15:13:39
Re: Probability and StatisticsExcellent, mathsyperson! Character is who you are when no one is looking. #13 2009-10-12 08:35:44
Re: Probability and StatisticsHi, could you please answer this problem? #14 2009-10-12 09:46:43
Re: Probability and StatisticsHi maudish; Last edited by bobbym (2009-10-12 09:50:38) In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #15 2009-10-13 13:59:42
Re: Probability and StatisticsHi maudish; The series can be eliminated because we only seek the coefficient of x^2 ( 2 rooks). Also since the board is square r = c. So. The above is the number of 2 non attacking rooks on a c x c chessboard. From a combinatorical argument and playing much spot the pattern. We can solve for n and clean up: Where n is the number of ways 2 rooks can be positioned on the white squares of a c x c chessboard when c is even. The above will generate the table given in the previous post, i.e. c = 2 then n = 0 c = 4 then n = 8 c = 6 then n = 36 c = 8 then n = 96 c = 10 then n = 200 . . . This is not a proof, just a conjecture. I have tested it for c = 16 by direct count. I suppose it might be proven by induction but the correct method is by partitioning the chessboard with it's forbidden black squares into disjoint boards and then using the rook polynomials to prove it. When I do that I will post it. Last edited by bobbym (2009-10-13 14:17:55) In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. #16 2011-03-01 16:42:16
Re: Probability and StatisticsIf I'm not wrong. Last edited by G-man (2011-03-01 17:22:56) Maths!...... #17 2011-03-01 17:00:15
Re: Probability and StatisticsHi G-man; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on. |