MHB Understanding Uniform Random Variables: Comparing $X$ and $Y = 1-X$

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the properties of two uniform random variables, $X \sim U(0,1)$ and $Y = 1 - X$. The participants analyze several statements regarding their distributions, expectations, and relationships. It is established that $F_X(u) = u$ for $0 \leq u \leq 1$, leading to the conclusion that $Y$ also follows a uniform distribution, $Y \sim U(0,1)$. The expectation $E(X + Y)$ is noted to equal 2, confirming that both variables are valid random variables. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying theory while tackling practical problems in probability.
Francobati
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Let $X\sim U(0,1)$ and define $Y=1-X$. What statement is TRUE?
(1): $F_{X}(u)\neq F_{Y}(u)$, for every $u\epsilon \left [ 0,1 \right ]$;
(2): $Y$ is not a rv;
(3): $E(X+Y)=2$;
(4): $Y\sim U(0,1)$;
(5): none of the remaining statements.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Francobati,

I am glad to find your interesting statistics questions! On MHB we always want you to give some kind of explanation of what you have tried. We are not a site that just "gives answers". So when you make a new thread it is best to always show what you have tried or what you know about the topic. This helps others see where you are stuck and how to best help.

So all of that said, what have you tried? What do you think about (3) for example?
 
Hello. Many thanks. You are absolutely right. I am studying probability, I am trying to read the theory, but unfortunately for the exercises and the applications I need somebody routes, I addresses, because the practice is very different from the theory and is at the same time useful to better understand the theory.
 
A good strategy is to check each statement separately. If $X \sim U(0,1)$ then it's distribution function $F_X$ is given by:
$$F_X(u) = \left \{ \begin{array}{lll} 0, \quad u <0 \\ u, \quad 0\leq u \leq 1 \\ 1, \quad u > 1 \end{array} \right.$$
(1): use the fact that $F_X(u) = \mathbb{P}(X \leq u)$. Therefore, $F_Y(u) = \mathbb{P}(Y \leq u) = P(1-X \leq u) = \ldots$.
(2): you can make use of statement (1)
(3): since $Y = 1-X$ it follows that $X+Y = \ldots$?
(4): again, make use of statement (1)
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. But this one involves probability, known as the Monty Hall Problem. Please see any number of YouTube videos on this for an explanation, I'll leave it to them to explain it. I question the predicate of all those who answer this...
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...
Back
Top