If the moment generation function is the integral of e^tx.fx(x).dx

RufusDawes
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
from zero to infinity,

and the first raw moment about zero is the first derivative of the mgf evaluated at t=0... then why do we need to integrate the function ?

Wouldn't the first raw moment just be e^tx.fx(x) dx, i.e the derivative of the function we just integrated ?

Why do we integrate and then find the derivative of the same function ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. You aren't paying attention to which variable is used in the integration and which variable is used in the differentiation. Look at some specific examples.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top