Purchase Solution

Two Proofs in Probability Theory

Not what you're looking for?

Ask Custom Question

Let (S, E, P) be a probability space.

(a) Let A <- E be an event such that P(A) = 0. Does it follow that A = PHI? If not, what can you say about A?
(b) Prove that if A, B <- E, then A INTERSECTION B <- E and A - B <- E.

Attachments
Purchase this Solution
Solution Summary

This solution of 258 words proves two statements in probability theory.

Solution Preview

(a) P(A) = 0 does not imply that A is empty - it just means that A has an infinitesimal probability of occurring. For example, consider the probability space of points on the line segment S = [0,1] with uniform probability distribution, i.e. if L is a subsegment of S, then P(L) is ...

Purchase this Solution
Free BrainMass Quizzes
Solving quadratic inequalities

This quiz test you on how well you are familiar with solving quadratic inequalities.

Probability Quiz

Some questions on probability

Exponential Expressions

In this quiz, you will have a chance to practice basic terminology of exponential expressions and how to evaluate them.

Graphs and Functions

This quiz helps you easily identify a function and test your understanding of ranges, domains , function inverses and transformations.

Geometry - Real Life Application Problems

Understanding of how geometry applies to in real-world contexts

View More Free Quizzes
Related BrainMass Solutions

  • Probabilities and Set Theory

    Proofs are provided for proabilities expressed with set theory. The solution is detailed and well presented.

  • Group theory

    This provides examples of group theory proofs using pigeonhole principle and inverse elements. It helps prove that a group is a finite group based on the two types of proofing principles.

  • Set Theory Proofs : Addition Principle

    Set theory proofs and the addition principle are investigated and discussed. The solution is detailed and well presented.

  • Algebraic theory

    Problem #2 Proof: In my understanding, . But . The statement is wrong. For example, , , then . , if , then we can find some , such that and . This is impossible. Thus . Hence . This is two proofs regarding abstract algebra.

  • Real Analysis Proofs : Set Operations

    166544 Real Analysis Proofs : Set Operations From Set Theory, Set Operation College level proof before real analysis. Please give formal proof. Please explain each step of your solution. Thank you.

  • Real Analysis Proofs : Set Operations

    166550 Real Analysis Proofs : Set Operations Provide counterexamples for each of the following.... From Set Theory, Set Operation. College level proof before real analysis. Please give formal proof. Please explain each step of your solution.

  • A Set Theory in Real Analysis

    230556 A Set Theory in Real Analysis Formal Math Proofs Prove that each of the following sets is countable: a) The set of all numbers with two distinct decimal expansions (like 0.500... and 0.4999...); b) The set of all rational points in the

  • Subspace proof

    201384 Subspace Proof - Matrix theory and analysis Please see the attached document. Thanks so much for your help. Show that S is a subspace of C... Please see the attachment. The expert examines matrix theory and analysis subspace proofs.

  • Fundamental Theorem of Galois Theory

    Note: It is assumed that you know the following results in order to prove this theorem. You may search for the proofs of these results. 1. G = Aut_F(K) has a subgroup of order p^(n-1) 2. The Fundamental Theorem of Galois Theory 3.

View More Related Solutions