Understanding Combinatorics: Probability of Selecting Balls from a Box

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nikitin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Combinatorics
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the probability of selecting balls from a box containing 2 red and 4 blue balls. The probability of drawing 2 blue balls is calculated using combinations, resulting in 6/15. For selecting 1 blue and 1 red ball, the correct method involves considering the different orders of selection, leading to a total probability of 8/15. The confusion arises from the difference between organized outcomes in the first scenario and the need for a combinatorial approach in the second. The explanation clarifies that direct calculation is often more effective than simply applying combinatorial formulas.
Nikitin
Messages
734
Reaction score
27
Hi. OK in a box there are 6 balls, 2 red ones and 4 blue ones. We take 2 balls out of the box without putting any of them back

1) If I wish to know the probability of selecting 2 blue ones, I just do this: (4above2)/(6above2)=6/15 or 4C2/6C2 or (4*3/2)/(6*5/2)2) BUT, if I wish to know the probability 1 blue and 1 red, I must use the first formula here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_distribution

(4above1)*(2above1)/(6above2)=8/15=p(1 blue and 1 red ball selected)

WHY can't we use the same logic as in the formula in 1) and do this: (4*2/2)/(6*5/2)=4/15 ?? why is just (4*2)/(6*5/2)=8/15 correct?

I mean, why are the number of relevant outcomes "unorganized" or "combinated" in 2) but in 1) they are "organized" and "permuted" ?

Excuse me for my english. I am hoping somebody can please explain this too me?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
so is my english the reason nobody wants to post a reply? If it helps I am talking about "hypergeometric" probability in 2)
 
Instead of mechanically using combinatorial formulas, you are better of with direct calculation.

For the first problem: Prob(first ball chosen is blue)=2/3, prob(second ball chosen is also blue)=3/5. Therefore prob(both balls are blue)=2/5.

For the second problem, there are two mutually exclusive ways of doing it - blue first and red second or red first and blue second. The first has prob 2/3 x 2/5 = 4/15. The second has prob 1/3 x 4/5 = 4/15. Total prob = 8/15.
 
aah thank you, i get it now ! :)
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K