Yes, you can blame me for that.this got serious real quick lol
Yes, you can blame me for that.this got serious real quick lol
In the Venn diagram, the two circles are separated from one another and as such the union of the two cases is one probability added onto the other. Next, for mutually inclusive the idea is this inclusion-exclusion principle. That is clear,Wait so how does showing that m=n show their independent events?
View attachment 33612
Wait so how does showing that m=n show their independent events?
View attachment 33612
Have you looked at my post here where I provided a different approach to this question?
Yep, Cm_tutor's method explicitly shows what is going on but what I did is my interpretation. I sometimes feel bad not knowing but it is good to be able to learn a few things ourselves.
So you would end up with geometric series = num_minutes_in_a_year, where n= num_times_finger_snapped. There is no way to solve this numerically so you will need to use inspection
In all cases, for the percentage change, we use the formula:Hivaclibtibcharkwa said:
So x is the current amount of lemonade as a fraction which may be less than one. You are taking 1/3 of current amount of lemonade not the full jug.View attachment 35247
Seems simple enough right? The answer the university gave is 1/3 + 1/2 = 5/6
But i wrote an equation for it and got a different answer being 3/4
View attachment 35248
To explain the equation.
x is the amount of lemonade in the jug to start off with.
1/3 of x was sold and then only one half of the jug was left
Am i doing something wrong? or is the question wrong?
In addition to the above, and in order to confirm the original answer, there is a slight variant of this question from the University of Wollongong, where the only difference is that the numbers were swapped (which leads to the same answer), as follows:Your assuming that x = 1. That's the only way you know that 1/3 of x is really 1/3
Eg. If the jug was 5/6 then one-third of the jug would be 5/18 not 1/3
In your example if the jug was 1 then 1/3 of 1 is 1/3. Hence you can do the subtraction. But we don't know that which is why we go
x (being the unknown amount in the jug) - (1/3 * x) being 1/3 of the unknown amount. View attachment 35251
First, perform the necessary conversions:
The null hypothesis is always an equality. The reason for this is computation.Can someone help me with these question, like with question b would the null hypothesis be that it’s less than 70 or would the alternative hypothesis say that?
So give the question a go first and I will check the working out.Ah sorry just realised I didn’t put in the imahe