Prove using three basic probability axioms

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the inequality P(A ∩ B) ≥ 1 - P(¬A) - P(¬B) for all A, B ⊆ S using three basic probability axioms. The proof begins by rearranging terms and applying the axioms, ultimately demonstrating that the inequality holds true. A key point raised is the importance of assuming the negation of the statement to derive a contradiction, which is a fundamental aspect of mathematical proofs.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic probability axioms, specifically P(A) properties
  • Familiarity with set operations, including union and intersection
  • Knowledge of disjoint events and their implications in probability
  • Ability to construct mathematical proofs and derive contradictions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the axioms of probability in various scenarios
  • Learn about disjoint events and their role in probability theory
  • Explore techniques for constructing proofs by contradiction
  • Investigate additional properties of probability measures and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, particularly those studying probability theory, educators teaching probability concepts, and anyone interested in mathematical proof techniques.

hassman
Messages
36
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that [itex]P(A \cap B)≥1-P(\bar{A})-P(\bar{B})[/itex]

for all [itex]A, B \subseteq S[/itex]using only these axioms:
1) [itex]0 \leq P(A) \leq 1[/itex], for any event [itex]A \subseteq S[/itex]
2) [itex]P(S) = 1[/itex]
3) [itex]P(A \cup B) = P(A) + P(B)[/itex] if and only if [itex]P(A \cap B) = 0[/itex]

Homework Equations


None.

The Attempt at a Solution



My proof:

First rearrange the shizzle:

[itex]P(\bar{A}) + P(A \cap B) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

Now using the fact that the first two terms are disjoint, use axiom 3 to obtain:

[itex]P(\bar{A} \cup (A \cap B)) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

Next note that the first term is equals to P(S), hence we get:

[itex]P(S) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

which holds for all [itex]B \subseteq S[/itex], because [itex]P(S) = 1[/itex] and [itex]P(\bar{B}) \geq 0[/itex] for all B.

Is this proof correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hassman said:

Homework Statement


Prove that [itex]P(A \cap B)≥1-P(\bar{A})-P(\bar{B})[/itex]

for all [itex]A, B \subseteq S[/itex]


using only these axioms:
1) [itex]0 \leq P(A) \leq 1[/itex], for any event [itex]A \subseteq S[/itex]
2) [itex]P(S) = 1[/itex]
3) [itex]P(A \cup B) = P(A) + P(B)[/itex] if and only if [itex]P(A \cap B) = 0[/itex]


Homework Equations


None.


The Attempt at a Solution



My proof:

First rearrange the shizzle:

[itex]P(\bar{A}) + P(A \cap B) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

Now using the fact that the first two terms are disjoint, use axiom 3 to obtain:

[itex]P(\bar{A} \cup (A \cap B)) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

Next note that the first term is equals to P(S), hence we get:

[itex]P(S) + P(\bar{B}) \geq 1[/itex]

which holds for all [itex]B \subseteq S[/itex], because [itex]P(S) = 1[/itex] and [itex]P(\bar{B}) \geq 0[/itex] for all B.

Is this proof correct?

In proof you can't start out claiming what you are trying to prove - you can only claim it isn't true and arriving at a contradiction. So you would say

Suppose [itex]P(A \cap B)<1-P(\bar{A})-P(\bar{B})[/itex] then try to arrive at a contradiction.
 
Got it! Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K