MHB How Did They Derive the Expression for P(Exactly One Match)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Usagi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Balls
Usagi
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Hi guys, really simple question but...

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5447/ballsra.jpg

I'm not quite sure on how they ended up with the expression for P(exactly one match). I would have done it in a more straight forward way, simply define A: matching the colour red in the red box only. B: matching the colour blue in the blue box only and C: matching the colour white in the white box only.

So P(exactly one match) = P(A)+P(B)+P(C) = \frac{3}{6} = \frac{1}{2}

How exactly did they get their expression?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Usagi said:
So P(exactly one match) = P(A)+P(B)+P(C) = \frac{3}{6} = \frac{1}{2}
Yes, this also works.

Usagi said:
How exactly did they get their expression?
See https://driven2services.com/staging/mh/index.php?threads/788/.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top