Consider a race that is run by several people, including Alice, Bob and Charlie.

1) Is it possible that the probability that Alice finishes before Bob is strictly greater than \( \frac{1}{2} \) AND the probability that Bob finishes before Alice is strictly greater than \( \frac{1}{2} \)?

2) Is it possible that the probability that Alice finishes before Bob is strictly greater than \( \frac{1}{2} \) AND the probability that Bob finishes before Charlie is strictly greater than \( \frac{1}{2} \) AND the probability that Charlie finishes before Alice is strictly greater that \( \frac{1}{2} \)?

Can we generalize this to having \(n\) people?

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:

TopNewestIf Alice finishes before Charlie, and Charlie finishes before Bob, i will be denoting it as \(\textrm{ACB}\). I will be assuming that no two people can finish together.

1) Let's assume both \(P(\text{AB}), P(\text{BA})\), are both strictly greater than \(\dfrac{1}{2}\), then this means \(P(\text{AB}) + P(\text{BA}) > 1\).

However, we know that \(\text{AB }\)and \(\text{BA}\) are mutually exclusive events, and collectively exhaustive, therefore \(P(\text{AB}) + P(\text{BA}) =1\). This is a contradiction, therefore our initial assumption was wrong, which means, both \(P(\text{AB})\) and \(P(\text{BA})\) cannot be strictly greater than \(\dfrac{1}{2}\)

2) I am working on this right now....

Log in to reply

I suppose this problem comes from nontransitive dice, although by making it a scenario of runners my thoughts of probability are suddenly shattered. Still figuring out how to formalize the probabilities as runners.

Log in to reply

That is a good interpretation, and gives you a possible construction almost immediately.

Log in to reply