I What is the probability of a cable having a breaking load greater than 6200 N?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter rexxii
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability Value
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the probability of a cable having a breaking load greater than 6200 N, given a normal distribution with a mean of 6000 N and a standard deviation of 155 N. The user correctly calculates the z-value as 1.29 but misinterprets the probability from the statistics table, confusing P(z < 1.290) with P(z > 1.290). The correct interpretation reveals that P(z > 1.290) is actually 0.0985, meaning there is a 9.85% chance that a randomly selected cable will exceed the breaking load of 6200 N. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the areas under the normal distribution curve and the relationship between z-values and probabilities. Clarification on these concepts is necessary for accurate probability calculations.
rexxii
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Probability - z value - stats issue
Hi,

I'm working on a question now where I need to calculate the z value. which I have been able to but I'm calculating a value off the normal distribution that is on the left-hand side of the normal distribution curve and it needs to on the right side. As the value I'm looking into is higher than the mean!

I cannot figure out how I would turn this around. its only one independent event there's no replacement or other variables.

the question is:

A cable manufacturer tests the cables it produces to find the breaking load. Over many years this has been assumed to be normally distributed with a mean of 6000 Newtons and standard deviation of 155 Newtons. Calculate the probability that a single cable chosen at random, will have a breaking load greater than 6200 N. Z = 6200 -6000 /155 = 1.29

Then I've written a probability statement (P z>1.290) = P z>1.290)

read from the stats tables that it could be 0.9015.

Said the breaking load is 90.15%

I know this is incorrect please can you advise The probability that a randomly selected cable will have a breaking load greater breaking load than 6200 Newtons is 90%.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
rexxii said:
Summary: Probability - z value - stats issue

Hi,

I'm working on a question now where I need to calculate the z value. which I have been able to but I'm calculating a value off the normal distribution that is on the left-hand side of the normal distribution curve and it needs to on the right side. As the value I'm looking into is higher than the mean!

I cannot figure out how I would turn this around. its only one independent event there's no replacement or other variables.

the question is:

A cable manufacturer tests the cables it produces to find the breaking load. Over many years this has been assumed to be normally distributed with a mean of 6000 Newtons and standard deviation of 155 Newtons. Calculate the probability that a single cable chosen at random, will have a breaking load greater than 6200 N. Z = 6200 -6000 /155 = 1.29

Then I've written a probability statement (P z>1.290) = P z>1.290)

read from the stats tables that it could be 0.9015.
You're reading the table wrong. The table is giving you P(z < 1.290) = 0.9015. So what would be the probability you want, P(z > 1.290)?
rexxii said:
Said the breaking load is 90.15%

I know this is incorrect please can you advise The probability that a randomly selected cable will have a breaking load greater breaking load than 6200 Newtons is 90%.
 
So i need to read from the RHS side? as it is above the mean? Would i still select that number or a different one of the table?
 
P(z < 1.290) = .9015, from the table. The number .9015 represents the area under the standard normal curve between ##z = -\infty## and z = 1.290. What is the total area under the curve? What's the area under the curve between z = 1.290 and ##z = +\infty##?
 
1.29 - 1 = 0.29 above the mean?
 
rexxii said:
1.29 - 1 = 0.29 above the mean?
No, and this doesn't make any sense -- you're mixing two unrelated things there: the z-value and the probability associated with a certain z-value.

Have you seen a graph of the standard normal curve? In the standard normal distribution, half of the area under the curve is to the left of the mean at z = 0, and the other half is to the right. What's the total area under the curve? How much of the area under the curve lies to the left of z = 1.29? How much of the area lies to the right of z = 1.29?

It would be a good idea to read the section in your textbook that has this problem. There's quite a bit you don't understand.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top