What is the probability of drawing a spade from a deck of 51 cards?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hholzer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Probability
hholzer
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Suppose you had a normal deck of 52 playing
cards and lost a card. You then decide to draw
a card from the remaining 51 cards.

What is the probability the drawn card is a spade?

Would this be appropriately captured by the following
events:
A : event card was drawn from the deck
S : event card drawn is a spade
S^c : event card drawn is not a spade

then

P(A) = P(A | S)P(S) + P(A|S^c)P(S^c)

But this is annoying me because
if we called S "event card drawn is a spade"
and A "event card was drawn from deck"
then P(A | S) doesn't seem to make much
sense to me. That is, "event card drawn
from the deck given drawn card is a spade"
is pretty much incoherent.

What am I missing or how can I resolve this issue?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi hholzer! :smile:
hholzer said:
Suppose you had a normal deck of 52 playing
cards and lost a card. You then decide to draw
a card from the remaining 51 cards.

What is the probability the drawn card is a spade?

Would this be appropriately captured by the following
events:
A : event card was drawn from the deck …

(btw, that's not the way we use the word "event" :wink:)

I don't understand what your A is supposed to be :confused:

You want P(S) …

split it up into P(S|lost card was a spade) and P(S|lost card was not a spade) :smile:

(are you sure you've copied the question correctly? it seems obvious the answer is 0.25 :confused:)
 
Ah, that's what I was trying to determine. So we break it up into
(Lost card was spade) and (Lose card not spade).

The answer is indeed 1/4 but I was more concerned
with how we partition the sample space.

And on the word "event", "event" is a subset of your sample space,
as you of course know. The three events would be:

S = {card randomly drawn from deck of 51 cards is a spade }
A = {lost card is a spade }
A^c = { lost card is not a spade }
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top