Solving for \pi_{H} and \pi_{L} in Limit Case

  • Thread starter Thread starter kayhm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving for probabilities A and B in the limit case where N, L, and M approach infinity. The equations provided include a linear combination of A and B equating to 1, along with two exponential equations set to a constant k. The simplified solution for A and B is derived as A = 1 - (kY^-H)^(1/(M-1)) and B = 1 - (kY^-L)^(1/(M-1)). There is an emphasis on the necessity of maintaining the first equation, indicating a constraint on the variables involved. The conversation highlights the challenge of understanding the original notation but concludes that the equations are manageable to solve.
kayhm
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Is there a way to solve for \pi_{H} and \pi_{L} which are probabilities when:

\pi_{H} N_{H} + \pi_{L} N_{L} = 1
(1 - \pi_{H})^{M-1} y_{H} = k
(1 - \pi_{L})^{M-1} y_{L} = k

It s ok to solve it for the limit case as N_{H}, N_{L}, and M go to infinity.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
leave alone solving it , i do not even understand the symbols in the question

can anyone explain to me what they are?
 
His notation is godawful but I think he wants to solve

AN^H + BN^L = 1
(1-A)^(M-1)Y^H = k
(1-B)^(M-1)Y^L = k

for A and B. And he's writing pi_h for A and pi_L for B

In this case the solution is obvious:
A =1 - (kY^-H)^1/(M-1)
B =1 - (kY^-L)^1/(M-1)
And the first equation must still be true meaning there is some kind of constraint on k, Y, H, M and L, and N whatever the heck those are.
 
Given two equations don't look too hard to solve, so why not give it a try?
 
Sorry. i fixed the notations to an easier to see format.

kayhm said:
Is there a way to solve for A and B which are probabilities when:

AN + BL = 1
(1 - A)^(M-1) x = k
(1 - B)^(M-1) y = k

It s ok to solve it for the limit case as N, L, and M go to infinity.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top