Definition of conditional probability and a problem.Discarding random variables in favor of a domain-less definition?very simple conditional probability questionConditional probability problem with urndrawing balls from an urn (conditional probability)Probability regarding balls and urns, uneven distributionProbability in urnsConditional Probability (2 Urns)Urn problem (Probability)Probability of selecting red ball from urnWhy doesn't the general formula for conditional probability produce the same answer as the tree diagram in this case?when to say that the given information is (intersection) not (conditional probability)?
Will casting a card from the graveyard with Flashback add a quest counter on Pyromancer Ascension?
Should I communicate in my applications that I'm unemployed out of choice rather than because nobody will have me?
Help understanding this line - usage of くれる
Why did the soldiers of the North disobey Jon?
Formal Definition of Dot Product
the grammar about `adv adv` as 'too quickly'
The meaning of the Middle English word “king”
White foam around tubeless tires
Why is it harder to turn a motor/generator with shorted terminals?
Promotion comes with unexpected 24/7/365 on-call
Hiker's Cabin Mystery | Pt. VI
Do Grothendieck universes matter for an algebraic geometer?
Is Valonqar prophecy unfulfilled?
Problem in downloading videos using youtube-dl from unsupported sites
Wireless headphones interfere with Wi-Fi signal on laptop
Did galley captains put corks in the mouths of slave rowers to keep them quiet?
complicated arrows in flowcharts
How to not get blinded by an attack at dawn
Why was my Canon Speedlite 600EX triggering other flashes?
Biology of a Firestarter
How to continually let my readers know what time it is in my story, in an organic way?
Source of the Wildfire?
Why are BJTs common in output stages of power amplifiers?
Unexpected Netflix account registered to my Gmail address - any way it could be a hack attempt?
Definition of conditional probability and a problem.
Discarding random variables in favor of a domain-less definition?very simple conditional probability questionConditional probability problem with urndrawing balls from an urn (conditional probability)Probability regarding balls and urns, uneven distributionProbability in urnsConditional Probability (2 Urns)Urn problem (Probability)Probability of selecting red ball from urnWhy doesn't the general formula for conditional probability produce the same answer as the tree diagram in this case?when to say that the given information is (intersection) not (conditional probability)?
$begingroup$
The Problem:
An urn contains 3 red and 4 black balls and another contains 4 red and 5 black.
A random ball is chosen from the first urn and is inserted into the second urn.
After this a random ball is chosen from the second urn.
Consider the events:
$A$ : "first ball is red", $B$ : "second ball is red".
Find the Probability $P_A(B)$ where "$P_A(B)$" means the probability that $B$ happens if $A$ has happened (i.e. the conditional probability of $B$ given $A$).
This is a simple problem right?
Why I'm confused:
But I'm confused. We work in the probability space $(Omega,Sigma,P)$
(in this case $Sigma=mathcal P(Omega)$), and $P$ is a probability that means is a function which respect kolmogorov axioms.
$P_A(B)=1/2$ (because if $A$ happened then in the second urn we will have 5 red balls and 5 black balls)
My question:
Here is my question: If $P_A(B)=fracP(A cap B)P(A)$ by definition (and $P $ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms). How we came to the conclusion $P_A(B)=1/2$? Using
$$fractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes?$$
This doesn't make sense for me. $P$ is fixed from the beginning, then we must find $P_A(B)$ using definition to be rigorous. I need a rigourous proof.
probability
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Problem:
An urn contains 3 red and 4 black balls and another contains 4 red and 5 black.
A random ball is chosen from the first urn and is inserted into the second urn.
After this a random ball is chosen from the second urn.
Consider the events:
$A$ : "first ball is red", $B$ : "second ball is red".
Find the Probability $P_A(B)$ where "$P_A(B)$" means the probability that $B$ happens if $A$ has happened (i.e. the conditional probability of $B$ given $A$).
This is a simple problem right?
Why I'm confused:
But I'm confused. We work in the probability space $(Omega,Sigma,P)$
(in this case $Sigma=mathcal P(Omega)$), and $P$ is a probability that means is a function which respect kolmogorov axioms.
$P_A(B)=1/2$ (because if $A$ happened then in the second urn we will have 5 red balls and 5 black balls)
My question:
Here is my question: If $P_A(B)=fracP(A cap B)P(A)$ by definition (and $P $ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms). How we came to the conclusion $P_A(B)=1/2$? Using
$$fractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes?$$
This doesn't make sense for me. $P$ is fixed from the beginning, then we must find $P_A(B)$ using definition to be rigorous. I need a rigourous proof.
probability
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
1
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
1
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Problem:
An urn contains 3 red and 4 black balls and another contains 4 red and 5 black.
A random ball is chosen from the first urn and is inserted into the second urn.
After this a random ball is chosen from the second urn.
Consider the events:
$A$ : "first ball is red", $B$ : "second ball is red".
Find the Probability $P_A(B)$ where "$P_A(B)$" means the probability that $B$ happens if $A$ has happened (i.e. the conditional probability of $B$ given $A$).
This is a simple problem right?
Why I'm confused:
But I'm confused. We work in the probability space $(Omega,Sigma,P)$
(in this case $Sigma=mathcal P(Omega)$), and $P$ is a probability that means is a function which respect kolmogorov axioms.
$P_A(B)=1/2$ (because if $A$ happened then in the second urn we will have 5 red balls and 5 black balls)
My question:
Here is my question: If $P_A(B)=fracP(A cap B)P(A)$ by definition (and $P $ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms). How we came to the conclusion $P_A(B)=1/2$? Using
$$fractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes?$$
This doesn't make sense for me. $P$ is fixed from the beginning, then we must find $P_A(B)$ using definition to be rigorous. I need a rigourous proof.
probability
$endgroup$
The Problem:
An urn contains 3 red and 4 black balls and another contains 4 red and 5 black.
A random ball is chosen from the first urn and is inserted into the second urn.
After this a random ball is chosen from the second urn.
Consider the events:
$A$ : "first ball is red", $B$ : "second ball is red".
Find the Probability $P_A(B)$ where "$P_A(B)$" means the probability that $B$ happens if $A$ has happened (i.e. the conditional probability of $B$ given $A$).
This is a simple problem right?
Why I'm confused:
But I'm confused. We work in the probability space $(Omega,Sigma,P)$
(in this case $Sigma=mathcal P(Omega)$), and $P$ is a probability that means is a function which respect kolmogorov axioms.
$P_A(B)=1/2$ (because if $A$ happened then in the second urn we will have 5 red balls and 5 black balls)
My question:
Here is my question: If $P_A(B)=fracP(A cap B)P(A)$ by definition (and $P $ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms). How we came to the conclusion $P_A(B)=1/2$? Using
$$fractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes?$$
This doesn't make sense for me. $P$ is fixed from the beginning, then we must find $P_A(B)$ using definition to be rigorous. I need a rigourous proof.
probability
probability
edited May 3 at 15:57
Xander Henderson
15.4k103556
15.4k103556
asked May 3 at 11:49
Ica SanduIca Sandu
11611
11611
4
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
1
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
1
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
1
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
1
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36
4
4
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
1
1
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The issue that you raised is a legitimate one. The calculation leading to $frac12$ in your question (and the calculations in both of the answers available as I write this) use the assumption that, when a ball is drawn from an urn, each of the balls in that urn is equally likely to be drawn. That assumption is part of what people usually understand by the phrase "a random ball is chosen", which occurs twice in the problem. Sometimes people express this more explicitly by saying that a ball is chosen "uniformly at random".
It is certainly possible to have physical situations where this assumption is incorrect. For example, if all the red balls are much smaller than the blue ones, settle to the bottom of the urn, and are almost impossible to find and grab. Then pulling a "random" ball from such an urn would not make all the balls equally probable.
The general theory of probability, with its arbitrary probability function $P$, is designed to apply to all situations, even ones where the sizes of the balls or some other irregularities make some balls more likely to be chosen than others. To solve problems like the one you quoted, one needs additional information about the function $P$. In the case at hand, "a random ball is chosen" was intended to supply the additional information that all balls in an urn are equally likely to be chosen.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(And $P$ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms)
We do know more. We know that our $mathsf P$ is the probability measure for the events of the described process. It has to obey the Kolmogrov axioms, but also be evaluated according to reasoning about the selection proceedure.
Here too our $Omega$ is not just an abstraction, but a set of outcomes for this ball selection process. Likewise our $mathcal F$ is the event algebra for this particular probability space, and our events, $A$ and $B$, are contained with in it.
$mathsf P_A(B)$, which is more commonly written $mathsf P(Bmid A)$, is the probability for selecting one from the red balls in the second urn when given that one red ball was added to the four red, and five black, balls originally in that urn. This is just the probability for obtaining one from five red balls among ten balls. Hence $mathsf P_A(B)$ equals $tfrac 510$.
$mathsf P(Acap B)$ is the probability for selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn to place in the second urn, then selecting one from the four-plus-one red balls among the nine-plus-one balls in the second urn. So $mathsf P(Acap B)$ equals $tfrac 37cdottfrac 510$, which is $tfrac 1570$.
$mathsf P(A)$ is the probability of selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn, which is just $tfrac 37$. So clearly $mathsf P(Acap B)/mathsf P(A)$ does equal $tfrac 510$ as anticipated.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$P(A)=frac37$. What is $P(Acap B)$? First we draw a red ball from urn $1$ with probability $frac37$. Then we independently draw a red ball from urn $2$ with probability $5over10$. So $$P(Acap B)=frac37cdot5over10=3over14$$ and $$P_A(B)=3/7over3/14=frac12.$$
Initially, we have $70$ outcomes: $7$ ways to draw a ball from urn $1$ and $10$ ways to draw a ball from urn $2$. Once we say that a red ball is drawn from urn $1$ we discard $40$ of those outcomes, and there are only $30$ left. I think you may be a bit confused when you say, "$P$ is fixed from the beginning." This is true of course, but $P_A$ is not the sam as $P$. Once we condition on $A$ we have a different probability space. The events are different, since those where a black ball is drawn first are gone. Of the $30$ remaining events $15$ are favorable: draw one of the $3$ red balls from urn $1$ and then draw one of the $5$ red balls from urn $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3212102%2fdefinition-of-conditional-probability-and-a-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The issue that you raised is a legitimate one. The calculation leading to $frac12$ in your question (and the calculations in both of the answers available as I write this) use the assumption that, when a ball is drawn from an urn, each of the balls in that urn is equally likely to be drawn. That assumption is part of what people usually understand by the phrase "a random ball is chosen", which occurs twice in the problem. Sometimes people express this more explicitly by saying that a ball is chosen "uniformly at random".
It is certainly possible to have physical situations where this assumption is incorrect. For example, if all the red balls are much smaller than the blue ones, settle to the bottom of the urn, and are almost impossible to find and grab. Then pulling a "random" ball from such an urn would not make all the balls equally probable.
The general theory of probability, with its arbitrary probability function $P$, is designed to apply to all situations, even ones where the sizes of the balls or some other irregularities make some balls more likely to be chosen than others. To solve problems like the one you quoted, one needs additional information about the function $P$. In the case at hand, "a random ball is chosen" was intended to supply the additional information that all balls in an urn are equally likely to be chosen.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The issue that you raised is a legitimate one. The calculation leading to $frac12$ in your question (and the calculations in both of the answers available as I write this) use the assumption that, when a ball is drawn from an urn, each of the balls in that urn is equally likely to be drawn. That assumption is part of what people usually understand by the phrase "a random ball is chosen", which occurs twice in the problem. Sometimes people express this more explicitly by saying that a ball is chosen "uniformly at random".
It is certainly possible to have physical situations where this assumption is incorrect. For example, if all the red balls are much smaller than the blue ones, settle to the bottom of the urn, and are almost impossible to find and grab. Then pulling a "random" ball from such an urn would not make all the balls equally probable.
The general theory of probability, with its arbitrary probability function $P$, is designed to apply to all situations, even ones where the sizes of the balls or some other irregularities make some balls more likely to be chosen than others. To solve problems like the one you quoted, one needs additional information about the function $P$. In the case at hand, "a random ball is chosen" was intended to supply the additional information that all balls in an urn are equally likely to be chosen.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The issue that you raised is a legitimate one. The calculation leading to $frac12$ in your question (and the calculations in both of the answers available as I write this) use the assumption that, when a ball is drawn from an urn, each of the balls in that urn is equally likely to be drawn. That assumption is part of what people usually understand by the phrase "a random ball is chosen", which occurs twice in the problem. Sometimes people express this more explicitly by saying that a ball is chosen "uniformly at random".
It is certainly possible to have physical situations where this assumption is incorrect. For example, if all the red balls are much smaller than the blue ones, settle to the bottom of the urn, and are almost impossible to find and grab. Then pulling a "random" ball from such an urn would not make all the balls equally probable.
The general theory of probability, with its arbitrary probability function $P$, is designed to apply to all situations, even ones where the sizes of the balls or some other irregularities make some balls more likely to be chosen than others. To solve problems like the one you quoted, one needs additional information about the function $P$. In the case at hand, "a random ball is chosen" was intended to supply the additional information that all balls in an urn are equally likely to be chosen.
$endgroup$
The issue that you raised is a legitimate one. The calculation leading to $frac12$ in your question (and the calculations in both of the answers available as I write this) use the assumption that, when a ball is drawn from an urn, each of the balls in that urn is equally likely to be drawn. That assumption is part of what people usually understand by the phrase "a random ball is chosen", which occurs twice in the problem. Sometimes people express this more explicitly by saying that a ball is chosen "uniformly at random".
It is certainly possible to have physical situations where this assumption is incorrect. For example, if all the red balls are much smaller than the blue ones, settle to the bottom of the urn, and are almost impossible to find and grab. Then pulling a "random" ball from such an urn would not make all the balls equally probable.
The general theory of probability, with its arbitrary probability function $P$, is designed to apply to all situations, even ones where the sizes of the balls or some other irregularities make some balls more likely to be chosen than others. To solve problems like the one you quoted, one needs additional information about the function $P$. In the case at hand, "a random ball is chosen" was intended to supply the additional information that all balls in an urn are equally likely to be chosen.
answered May 3 at 17:38
Andreas BlassAndreas Blass
51k453112
51k453112
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(And $P$ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms)
We do know more. We know that our $mathsf P$ is the probability measure for the events of the described process. It has to obey the Kolmogrov axioms, but also be evaluated according to reasoning about the selection proceedure.
Here too our $Omega$ is not just an abstraction, but a set of outcomes for this ball selection process. Likewise our $mathcal F$ is the event algebra for this particular probability space, and our events, $A$ and $B$, are contained with in it.
$mathsf P_A(B)$, which is more commonly written $mathsf P(Bmid A)$, is the probability for selecting one from the red balls in the second urn when given that one red ball was added to the four red, and five black, balls originally in that urn. This is just the probability for obtaining one from five red balls among ten balls. Hence $mathsf P_A(B)$ equals $tfrac 510$.
$mathsf P(Acap B)$ is the probability for selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn to place in the second urn, then selecting one from the four-plus-one red balls among the nine-plus-one balls in the second urn. So $mathsf P(Acap B)$ equals $tfrac 37cdottfrac 510$, which is $tfrac 1570$.
$mathsf P(A)$ is the probability of selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn, which is just $tfrac 37$. So clearly $mathsf P(Acap B)/mathsf P(A)$ does equal $tfrac 510$ as anticipated.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(And $P$ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms)
We do know more. We know that our $mathsf P$ is the probability measure for the events of the described process. It has to obey the Kolmogrov axioms, but also be evaluated according to reasoning about the selection proceedure.
Here too our $Omega$ is not just an abstraction, but a set of outcomes for this ball selection process. Likewise our $mathcal F$ is the event algebra for this particular probability space, and our events, $A$ and $B$, are contained with in it.
$mathsf P_A(B)$, which is more commonly written $mathsf P(Bmid A)$, is the probability for selecting one from the red balls in the second urn when given that one red ball was added to the four red, and five black, balls originally in that urn. This is just the probability for obtaining one from five red balls among ten balls. Hence $mathsf P_A(B)$ equals $tfrac 510$.
$mathsf P(Acap B)$ is the probability for selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn to place in the second urn, then selecting one from the four-plus-one red balls among the nine-plus-one balls in the second urn. So $mathsf P(Acap B)$ equals $tfrac 37cdottfrac 510$, which is $tfrac 1570$.
$mathsf P(A)$ is the probability of selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn, which is just $tfrac 37$. So clearly $mathsf P(Acap B)/mathsf P(A)$ does equal $tfrac 510$ as anticipated.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(And $P$ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms)
We do know more. We know that our $mathsf P$ is the probability measure for the events of the described process. It has to obey the Kolmogrov axioms, but also be evaluated according to reasoning about the selection proceedure.
Here too our $Omega$ is not just an abstraction, but a set of outcomes for this ball selection process. Likewise our $mathcal F$ is the event algebra for this particular probability space, and our events, $A$ and $B$, are contained with in it.
$mathsf P_A(B)$, which is more commonly written $mathsf P(Bmid A)$, is the probability for selecting one from the red balls in the second urn when given that one red ball was added to the four red, and five black, balls originally in that urn. This is just the probability for obtaining one from five red balls among ten balls. Hence $mathsf P_A(B)$ equals $tfrac 510$.
$mathsf P(Acap B)$ is the probability for selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn to place in the second urn, then selecting one from the four-plus-one red balls among the nine-plus-one balls in the second urn. So $mathsf P(Acap B)$ equals $tfrac 37cdottfrac 510$, which is $tfrac 1570$.
$mathsf P(A)$ is the probability of selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn, which is just $tfrac 37$. So clearly $mathsf P(Acap B)/mathsf P(A)$ does equal $tfrac 510$ as anticipated.
$endgroup$
(And $P$ is a function, we don't know what function just this function respect Kolmogorov axioms)
We do know more. We know that our $mathsf P$ is the probability measure for the events of the described process. It has to obey the Kolmogrov axioms, but also be evaluated according to reasoning about the selection proceedure.
Here too our $Omega$ is not just an abstraction, but a set of outcomes for this ball selection process. Likewise our $mathcal F$ is the event algebra for this particular probability space, and our events, $A$ and $B$, are contained with in it.
$mathsf P_A(B)$, which is more commonly written $mathsf P(Bmid A)$, is the probability for selecting one from the red balls in the second urn when given that one red ball was added to the four red, and five black, balls originally in that urn. This is just the probability for obtaining one from five red balls among ten balls. Hence $mathsf P_A(B)$ equals $tfrac 510$.
$mathsf P(Acap B)$ is the probability for selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn to place in the second urn, then selecting one from the four-plus-one red balls among the nine-plus-one balls in the second urn. So $mathsf P(Acap B)$ equals $tfrac 37cdottfrac 510$, which is $tfrac 1570$.
$mathsf P(A)$ is the probability of selecting one from the three red balls among the seven balls in the first urn, which is just $tfrac 37$. So clearly $mathsf P(Acap B)/mathsf P(A)$ does equal $tfrac 510$ as anticipated.
edited May 3 at 13:14
answered May 3 at 12:44
Graham KempGraham Kemp
89k43579
89k43579
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$P(A)=frac37$. What is $P(Acap B)$? First we draw a red ball from urn $1$ with probability $frac37$. Then we independently draw a red ball from urn $2$ with probability $5over10$. So $$P(Acap B)=frac37cdot5over10=3over14$$ and $$P_A(B)=3/7over3/14=frac12.$$
Initially, we have $70$ outcomes: $7$ ways to draw a ball from urn $1$ and $10$ ways to draw a ball from urn $2$. Once we say that a red ball is drawn from urn $1$ we discard $40$ of those outcomes, and there are only $30$ left. I think you may be a bit confused when you say, "$P$ is fixed from the beginning." This is true of course, but $P_A$ is not the sam as $P$. Once we condition on $A$ we have a different probability space. The events are different, since those where a black ball is drawn first are gone. Of the $30$ remaining events $15$ are favorable: draw one of the $3$ red balls from urn $1$ and then draw one of the $5$ red balls from urn $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$P(A)=frac37$. What is $P(Acap B)$? First we draw a red ball from urn $1$ with probability $frac37$. Then we independently draw a red ball from urn $2$ with probability $5over10$. So $$P(Acap B)=frac37cdot5over10=3over14$$ and $$P_A(B)=3/7over3/14=frac12.$$
Initially, we have $70$ outcomes: $7$ ways to draw a ball from urn $1$ and $10$ ways to draw a ball from urn $2$. Once we say that a red ball is drawn from urn $1$ we discard $40$ of those outcomes, and there are only $30$ left. I think you may be a bit confused when you say, "$P$ is fixed from the beginning." This is true of course, but $P_A$ is not the sam as $P$. Once we condition on $A$ we have a different probability space. The events are different, since those where a black ball is drawn first are gone. Of the $30$ remaining events $15$ are favorable: draw one of the $3$ red balls from urn $1$ and then draw one of the $5$ red balls from urn $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$P(A)=frac37$. What is $P(Acap B)$? First we draw a red ball from urn $1$ with probability $frac37$. Then we independently draw a red ball from urn $2$ with probability $5over10$. So $$P(Acap B)=frac37cdot5over10=3over14$$ and $$P_A(B)=3/7over3/14=frac12.$$
Initially, we have $70$ outcomes: $7$ ways to draw a ball from urn $1$ and $10$ ways to draw a ball from urn $2$. Once we say that a red ball is drawn from urn $1$ we discard $40$ of those outcomes, and there are only $30$ left. I think you may be a bit confused when you say, "$P$ is fixed from the beginning." This is true of course, but $P_A$ is not the sam as $P$. Once we condition on $A$ we have a different probability space. The events are different, since those where a black ball is drawn first are gone. Of the $30$ remaining events $15$ are favorable: draw one of the $3$ red balls from urn $1$ and then draw one of the $5$ red balls from urn $2$.
$endgroup$
$P(A)=frac37$. What is $P(Acap B)$? First we draw a red ball from urn $1$ with probability $frac37$. Then we independently draw a red ball from urn $2$ with probability $5over10$. So $$P(Acap B)=frac37cdot5over10=3over14$$ and $$P_A(B)=3/7over3/14=frac12.$$
Initially, we have $70$ outcomes: $7$ ways to draw a ball from urn $1$ and $10$ ways to draw a ball from urn $2$. Once we say that a red ball is drawn from urn $1$ we discard $40$ of those outcomes, and there are only $30$ left. I think you may be a bit confused when you say, "$P$ is fixed from the beginning." This is true of course, but $P_A$ is not the sam as $P$. Once we condition on $A$ we have a different probability space. The events are different, since those where a black ball is drawn first are gone. Of the $30$ remaining events $15$ are favorable: draw one of the $3$ red balls from urn $1$ and then draw one of the $5$ red balls from urn $2$.
answered May 3 at 12:41
saulspatzsaulspatz
19k41636
19k41636
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
Why $P(A)=3/7$ Of course i know ...but remember $P$ is a function which respect Kolmogorov axioms. This is all I know. From here maybe we can define $P(A)=3/7$ (because is intuitive and more define $P(E) $where $E$ is an event, and check if $P$ is a probability on $Omega$) but I'm not sure.
$endgroup$
– Ica Sandu
May 3 at 13:09
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@IcaSandu I don't understand what you mean. $P$ is a probability measure, yes. That statement alone is not sufficient to determine any of the values of $P$ except $P(emptyset)=0, P(A)=1.$
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
May 3 at 19:29
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3212102%2fdefinition-of-conditional-probability-and-a-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
$begingroup$
"Using $dfractextNumber of Favorable OutcomestextTotal Number of Possible Outcomes$"... Be very careful with that as it is frequently incorrect. You may only say a probability is for sure the number of favorable divided by total number of outcomes in the event that each outcome is equally likely to occur. In many problems that is not going to be the case. There are two outcomes to a lottery, you either win or you lose, but you certainly don't win with probability $frac12$.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
May 3 at 11:52
1
$begingroup$
Your questions are legal and characteristic for someone who emphatically is taught that probability theory on this level is utterly depending on probability spaces. Let me try to put at ease: I predict that - if you gain more and more insight in probability theory - once upon a time questions like this will not bother you anymore. Also I like to refer to this question and its answers on the subject. By solving problems we usually do not have to wonder how the underlying probability space (more than one possibilities) looks like.
$endgroup$
– drhab
May 3 at 12:46
1
$begingroup$
Note that you will practically never be able to deduce a probability distribution by rigorous application of the axioms to a problem that is posed in terms like these, because even if you can make a list of outcomes that happen to be equally likely, there is no basis in the probability axioms for saying the likelihood is equal. Instead, when the problem does not explicitly state a probability distribution, you must make a judgment about what probability distribution the problem-setter meant it to have.
$endgroup$
– David K
May 3 at 17:36