MHB What is the Probability of Winning a Dice Game?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pretzel1998
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dice
pretzel1998
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi There!

This is my first time posting on this forums, so I hope I am following the right etiquette.

Im having some severe difficulties with the problems under Question 3 in this past exam paper. http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/nqfdocs/ncea-resource/exams/2014/91267-exm-2014.pdf
Can someone please check my answers and explain the questions where I faceplanted? Thanks

3. (a), I got 1/9 which I am pretty sure is good.
3. (b), I got 2/3 which I am pretty sure is good.
3. (c,i). I got 1/81, I am not very confident about this answer because the wording of the question is incredibly bad. I did 4/36 X 4/36 as that's the probability he gets 5 on the first roll, and then 5 on the second roll to win?
3. (c,ii). I got 13/1458, I don't think I got this right because it seems like such a crazy probability. I did the probability he got the sum of 5 on the first roll (4/36), multiplied by the probability that he did not get a sum of 5 on the second roll (13/18 I think? I might be wrong), the multiplied again by the probability that he will get a sum of 5. so in total (4/36 X 13/18 X 4/36 = 13/1458)? Really confused about this question.
3. (d) This question I had absolutely no idea what to do. I some how got 7/18, but I think I am wrong.

Thanks so much!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
pretzel1998 said:
Hi There!

This is my first time posting on this forums, so I hope I am following the right etiquette.

Im having some severe difficulties with the problems under Question 3 in this past exam paper. http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/nqfdocs/ncea-resource/exams/2014/91267-exm-2014.pdf
Can someone please check my answers and explain the questions where I faceplanted? Thanks

3. (a), I got 1/9 which I am pretty sure is good. I agree.
3. (b), I got 2/3 which I am pretty sure is good. I agree.
3. (c,i). I got 1/81, I am not very confident about this answer because the wording of the question is incredibly bad. I did 4/36 X 4/36 as that's the probability he gets 5 on the first roll, and then 5 on the second roll to win? I think that for part (c) you are meant to assume that he got a 5 on the first roll, so you only need to find the probability of scoring 5 on the second roll. If so, then the answer would be 1/9 rather than 1/81.
3. (c,ii). I got 13/1458, I don't think I got this right because it seems like such a crazy probability. I did the probability he got the sum of 5 on the first roll (4/36), multiplied by the probability that he did not get a sum of 5 on the second roll (13/18 I think? I might be wrong), the multiplied again by the probability that he will get a sum of 5. so in total (4/36 X 13/18 X 4/36 = 13/1458)? Really confused about this question. Here again, if you ignore the 1/9 that came from the first roll, you would get 13/162 rather than 13/1458, and I think that would be the answer they are looking for.
3. (d) This question I had absolutely no idea what to do. I some how got 7/18, but I think I am wrong.
On the first roll, M has a 2/9 probability of winning and W has a 1/9 probability. To make the game fair, the second roll must be arranged so that M's and W's overall probability of winning are both 1/2. The probability of a second roll being necessary is 2/3. If the second roll is arranged in such a way that M's probability of winning it is 15/36 (and W's probability of winning it is 21/36), then M's chances of winning the game are 2/9 (on the first roll) plus (2/3)x(15/36) (on the second roll). That comes to $\color{red}{\frac29 + \frac5{18} = \frac12}$, as required. So I think the answer should be 15/36.

Thanks so much!
...
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top