the very first question is bafflingly stupid to me. to conclude that non-connecting events or information are conclusive because you have a simpler conclusion does not imply probability when you have facts supporting a "subset." to say that linda is outspoken, studied philosophy, and is concerned about social justice, discrimination, and participates in activism. you have a higher probable chance, since she is a woman, to conclude that she is a feminist. thus you can conclude from the options given that she is a bank teller. if you take out bank teller from the "subset" you will find that "major sets" are simply logical, and adding them together only implies fact to logical leaps.

i also find fault with your lottery question. the probability of winning the lottery is 49^6, power ball does not impact probability because you still have a 1 in 49 chance to get the number as with the random order of the numbers being that you have 5 numbers to get right in a 1 in 49 chance... over all this is 1 in 13 billion. so its far more probable to roll a 6 20 times in a row. the real answer is you probably have a weighted die…

i won't be taking more of your tests until you fix them because i can conclude that 2 out 3 questions mean a higher probable chance of the rest of these questions being as flawed as the first 3...

No vote yet

1 vote

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Easy Math Editor

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestThe specific facts of the matter are irrelevant here; what matters is you have Property A vs. Property A AND Property B where both are non-zero.

If you pick all people at random with just Property A, the group

hasto be larger than the group that has both properties. This is a well known probability problem called the Conjunction Fallacy.The problem is very specific about the lottery in question being a 1 in 300 million chance. Are you assuming we are using Powerball specifically? There are many different lotteries with many different odds.

In the future, if you have concerns about a problem's wording/clarity/etc., you can report the problem. See how here.

Log in to reply

if facts hold no relevance in probability, then probability holds no relevance. if you have a set of likely outcomes, you can't calculate an answer without numerical translation otherwise. to conclude such a leap in logic is irrational. i stand my ground that subsets are just main sets of logical progression, and since probability is just logic in numerical format, assumption based on material ingredient is only logical or probable. the facts about the girl are the only substance to create probability from and thus without them you have no probability. if the subset were to lack career options, then you'd still have a main logical set to consider above an irrational set.

Log in to reply

Mathematics is designed to deal with general situations without numbers. We know that if a<b, and b<c, then a<c, without knowing what the numbers are.

Similarly, we know that P(A) [the probability of just A] must be a subset of P(A) and P(B). This is a general mathematical fact that can be applied without knowing what the specific numbers are.

The whole point in mathematics, really is generalization: if all we did was calculate on specific scenarios, we would never learn any of the general theorems that power the higher parts of mathematics.

Log in to reply