Is P(A-B) = P(A) -P(B)Here p is the probability function

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of probability functions, specifically examining the relationship between the probabilities of set differences and independent events. The original poster questions whether P(A-B) equals P(A) - P(B), prompting exploration of set relationships and independence in probability.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants explore the conditions under which P(A-B) equals P(A) - P(B), particularly focusing on subset relationships. Others present examples to illustrate cases where this equality holds or fails. Additionally, there is a discussion on proving the independence of events A and B' given the independence of A and B, with attempts to derive relevant probability equations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing examples and reasoning to support their claims. There are multiple interpretations being explored regarding the original question about set differences, and some participants are engaged in proving independence of events, indicating a productive exchange of ideas.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific sets and probabilities, including examples involving multiples of numbers and the universal set. There is an emphasis on the definitions of set operations and the implications of independence in probability.

crotical
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Is
P(A-B) = P(A) -P(B)

Here p is the probability function
Please help
 
Physics news on Phys.org


If B is a subset of A then, yes. However, if B is not a subset of A, in which case "A- BZ means "all members of A that are not also in B", this is not necessarily true. For example, suppose we choose a number from 1 to 100, each number being equally likely. Let A be the set of all multiples of 3, Be the set of all multiples of 6. There are 100/3= 33 multiples of 3 so P(A)= 0.33. There are 100/6= 16 multiples of 6 so P(B)= 16/100= 0.16. Of course, all multiples of 6 are multiples of 3 so A- B is just all multiples of 3 that are NOT multiples of 6 and there are 33- 16= 17 such numbers. P(A- B)= 17/100= 0.17= 0.33- 0.16= P(A)- P(B).

But suppose that B, instead of being "multiples of 6" is "even numbers (multiples of 2)". We still have P(A)= 0.33 but now P(B)= 0.5. Of course it is impossible that "P(A- B)= P(A)- P(B)" because P(A)- P(B)= 0.33- 0.5= -0.17 and a probability cannot be negative. In fact, "A- B" would mean removing from A all those numbers that are even and multiples of 2 which is the same as "multiples of 6". For this A and B, we would still have P(A-B)= 0.17 which is, as I said, NOT "P(A)- P(B)".
 


Is this proof valid
Given P(A) and P(B) are independent , prove P(A) and P(B') independent too.
P(A∩B) = P(A)P(B)
P(A∩B) = P(A)P(S-B')
=P(A)(1-P(B'))
=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩B)=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩(S-B'))=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A-A∩(B'))=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A)-P(A∩B')=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩B')=P(A)P(B')
 


I took S here as universal set
 


crotical said:
Is this proof valid
Given P(A) and P(B) are independent , prove P(A) and P(B') independent too.
P(A∩B) = P(A)P(B)
P(A∩B) = P(A)P(S-B')
=P(A)(1-P(B'))
=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩B)=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩(S-B'))=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A-A∩(B'))=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A)-P(A∩B')=P(A)-P(A)P(B')
P(A∩B')=P(A)P(B')

You can shorten it a bit: [itex]A = A\cap[B \cup B'] = (A \cap B) \cup (A \cap B'),[/itex] and these last two sets are mutually exclusive. Thus [itex]P(A) = P(A \cap B) + P(A \cap B'), \text{ hence } P(A \cap B') = P(A) - P(A) \cdot P(B) = P(A) \cdot P(B').[/itex]

RGV
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K