MHB Probability of winning dice game

TheFallen018
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Hey, so I've got this problem that I'm trying to figure out. I've worked out something that I think is probably right through simulation, but I'm not really sure how to tackle it from a purely mathematical probability perspective. So, would anyone know how I should approach this? I've tried a few different things, but my two answers tend to conflict a little. Thanks,

View attachment 8168
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_12.jpg
    Screenshot_12.jpg
    75.3 KB · Views: 131
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The starting point (which I guess you already know) is to make a list of the probabilities $p(x)$ of rolling a total of $x$ with the two dice, where $x$ goes from $2$ to $12$. These are $$\begin{array}{r|ccccccccccc}x& 2&3&4&5&6 &7&8&9&10 &11&12\\ \hline p(x) & \frac1{36} & \frac2{36} & \frac3{36} & \frac4{36} & \frac5{36} & \frac6{36} & \frac5{36} & \frac4{36} & \frac3{36} & \frac2{36} & \frac1{36} \end{array}.$$

The probability of an immediate win on the first roll is $p(7)+p(11)$. To win at a later stage, you first need to roll an $x$ (where $x$ is $4,5,6,8,9$ or $10$). You then need to roll another $x$ before rolling a $7$. The probability of those two things happening is $p(x)\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}$. Putting in the numbers, and adding the various probabilities, I get the overall probability of a win to be $\dfrac{244}{495} \approx 0.49292929\ldots$.
 
Opalg said:
The starting point (which I guess you already know) is to make a list of the probabilities $p(x)$ of rolling a total of $x$ with the two dice, where $x$ goes from $2$ to $12$. These are $$\begin{array}{r|ccccccccccc}x& 2&3&4&5&6 &7&8&9&10 &11&12\\ \hline p(x) & \frac1{36} & \frac2{36} & \frac3{36} & \frac4{36} & \frac5{36} & \frac6{36} & \frac5{36} & \frac4{36} & \frac3{36} & \frac2{36} & \frac1{36} \end{array}.$$

The probability of an immediate win on the first roll is $p(7)+p(11)$. To win at a later stage, you first need to roll an $x$ (where $x$ is $4,5,6,8,9$ or $10$). You then need to roll another $x$ before rolling a $7$. The probability of those two things happening is $p(x)\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}$. Putting in the numbers, and adding the various probabilities, I get the overall probability of a win to be $\dfrac{244}{495} \approx 0.49292929\ldots$.

Wow, that works really well. I thought it was going to be much more complicated and messy than that, which is a beautiful solution. I'm curious though, is that equation $p(x)\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}$ something that you derived for this, or is this a standard formula for similar problems.If it's something that you derived, would you be able to explain how you came up with it? If it's a standard equation, would you happen to know it's name? I'd love to understand better how and why it works. Thanks
 
TheFallen018 said:
Wow, that works really well. I thought it was going to be much more complicated and messy than that, which is a beautiful solution. I'm curious though, is that equation $p(x)\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}$ something that you derived for this, or is this a standard formula for similar problems.If it's something that you derived, would you be able to explain how you came up with it? If it's a standard equation, would you happen to know it's name? I'd love to understand better how and why it works. Thanks
In the expression ${\color {red} p(x)}{\color {green}\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}}$, the red $\color {red} p(x)$ gives the probability that the first roll of the dice gives the value $x$. The green fraction represents the probability of rolling $x$ again before rolling a $7$. My argument for that is that after rolling the first $x$, you can completely disregard any subsequent rolls until either an $x$ or a $7$ turns up. The only question is, which one of those will appear first. The relative probabilities of $x$ and $7$ are in the proportion $p(x)$ to $p(7)$. So out of a combined probability of $p(x) + p(7)$, the probability of an $x$ is $\dfrac{p(x)}{p(x)+p(7)}$, and the probability of a $7$ is $\dfrac{p(7)}{p(x)+p(7)}$.

I hope that makes sense.
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top