Are you asking why H and I are true? Draw two non-overlapping circles A and B. Is it true that A is located inside the exterior of B?
I'm stuck on this last problem... I been rereading the textbook but can't figure where I went wrong ... Help please...
At first, I thought it would only be A and subsets wouldn't apply to it. However, that was wrong :/.
Q. Suppose 0<P(A)<1 and 0<P(B)<1. If A implies not B then (select all that apply)
A. http://i47.tinypic.com/2v3o2rn.png
Thank you so much.
Mathematics uses logical laws to build its arguments, and logical laws in turn are just a refinement of common sense. There are two ways to explain a basic logical argument. One is to posit axioms and rules of inference and to show how the argument conforms to them. This way is suitable to convince a computer, but it does not give much clarity to people. The other way is to see how the argument follows the same reasoning we use every day in ordinary life.
Suppose A is the property of being a cat (which can be associated with the set of all cats), and B is the property of being a dog (or, again, the set of all dogs). Then A implies not B. Also, cats form a subset of all non-dogs and dogs form a subset of all non-cats.
Note that the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A and B are disjoint
(2) A is a subset of the complement of B (or, A implies not B)
(3) B is a subset of the complement of A (or, B implies not A)
Ok I get where you were going... I stuck with mutual exclusive since a friend of mine who I talked with was sure it was mutual exclusive... ... I still have trouble finding the difference b/w ME and independent...
After some reading, it seems like they're dependent... umm...
Events A and B are independent if the fact that A occurred carries no information whether B occurred at the same time. For example, when you roll two dies, the result of the first roll says nothing about the result of the second one. Events A and B are mutually exclusive if the fact that A occurred carries a lot of information about B, namely, that B did not occur. For example, the event that a die roll produced 1 and the event that the same die roll produced 6 are mutually exclusive. Note, however, that mutually exclusive events are not necessarily exhaustive (the die roll could also produce 2, 3, 4 and 5).
Could it be that this could be both mutually exclusive and dependent then? Since A implies not B (mutual exclusive). Since B is somewhat relying on A, it'd be dependent? Would it just be:
A: A and B are mutually exclusive ###
B: A and B are independent
C: A and B are dependent ###
D: A is a subset of B
E: B is a subset of A
F: not A is a subset of B
G: not B is a subset of A
H: A is a subset of not B ###
I: B is a subset of not A ###
J: not B is a subset of not A
K: not A is a subset of not B
L: none of the above
Can you double check my list of answer again one last time emakarov? I'm down to my last assignment submission and I just need this problem to get 100% on this homework . I don't want to screw up. It has been driving me crazy last night and so far today... Thanks a lot.
A: A and B are mutually exclusive ###
B: A and B are independent
C: A and B are dependent ###
D: A is a subset of B
E: B is a subset of A
F: not A is a subset of B
G: not B is a subset of A
H: A is a subset of not B ###
I: B is a subset of not A ###
J: not B is a subset of not A
K: not A is a subset of not B
L: none of the above