victoria jones the whore

[Wally]

Either him or the weird Uncle (my personal favourite =P ) Australian-Capital-Territory Jones.

haha that's gold!! 

[funkyducky]

Either him or the weird Uncle (my personal favourite =P ) Australian-Capital-Territory Jones.

Or his brother, Australian-Antarctic-Territory Jones, who lives far away, but visits every second Christmas.

[lorcan_raven]

I am absolutely outraged.
I only continued with Maths after year 10 for the PRIVELIDGE of the infamous Tasmania Jones question.
I did NOT sign up for his fucking clay-building, under-sexed and unemployed hippie cousin Victoria.
VCAA you have disgraced yourself.

[werdna]

 

[vexx]

what method did u use to get 1.21?

Find probability of 0, 1 and 2. Then draw up the distribution thingo and find mean that way.

hmm i did this, i found them using a matrix with T^(n-1)*initial for each, and then did a discrete probability table timing each probability.. i got 1.92 though arghh, wrong method?

[slothpomba]

Its late and i think ive developed an adaption to my regular caffeine dose so im pretty messed up but here goes...

I found the probability for 1 and 2. (Not 3 sets!!! they said we knew the first statue was regular or something... so thats 1/3 already gone...2 left)
Using markov.
I just then added the probabilities together i think and /2 ....

Bullshit method i know but i got the answer so...*shrug*

[costa94]

given first was regular, draw a PD table with Pr of 0 being superior, Pr of 1 being superior and Pr of 2 being supeior. check that they add to give 1.
then just do sum of x times pr(X=x) and you get 1.21

[doter]

I did this but also did pr (x=3), why on earth did I do this extra bit
can't remember the exact question
fml

[gamblor0]

what method did u use to get 1.21?

i cant believe i got this right, i full skipped it then went back to it in the last 3 mi utes and just bullshitted hoping to get some marks, but ended up bullshitting the correct answer!! haha

anywho this is how i did it, i made a tree diagram, then worked out all the sample spaces and there percentages, which were {RRR} {RRS} {RSR} and {RSS}. i then multiplied the each of the sample space percentages by how many S's were in them, so for {RRR} i did 0x.45x.45, for {RRS} i did 1x.45x.55, for {RSR} i did 1x.55x.25 and for {RSS} i did 2x.55x.75 and wallah!! the answer spat out 1.21 which seems to be correct.

im doubting that is the correct way to work it out as i just bullshitted using common logic but yeh, fuckin sickkk!!

[JinXi]

what method did u use to get 1.21?

i cant believe i got this right, i full skipped it then went back to it in the last 3 mi utes and just bullshitted hoping to get some marks, but ended up bullshitting the correct answer!! haha

anywho this is how i did it, i made a tree diagram, then worked out all the sample spaces and there percentages, which were {RRR} {RRS} {RSR} and {RSS}. i then multiplied the each of the sample space percentages by how many S's were in them, so for {RRR} i did 0x.45x.45, for {RRS} i did 1x.45x.55, for {RSR} i did 1x.55x.25 and for {RSS} i did 2x.55x.75 and wallah!! the answer spat out 1.21 which seems to be correct.

im doubting that is the correct way to work it out as i just bullshitted using common logic but yeh, fuckin sickkk!!

I did exactly that, then went a step further and rounded it down to 1.... thought it was really smart at that time =.= feel like an idoit now xD

[cipherpol]

what method did u use to get 1.21?

i cant believe i got this right, i full skipped it then went back to it in the last 3 mi utes and just bullshitted hoping to get some marks, but ended up bullshitting the correct answer!! haha

anywho this is how i did it, i made a tree diagram, then worked out all the sample spaces and there percentages, which were {RRR} {RRS} {RSR} and {RSS}. i then multiplied the each of the sample space percentages by how many S's were in them, so for {RRR} i did 0x.45x.45, for {RRS} i did 1x.45x.55, for {RSR} i did 1x.55x.25 and for {RSS} i did 2x.55x.75 and wallah!! the answer spat out 1.21 which seems to be correct.

im doubting that is the correct way to work it out as i just bullshitted using common logic but yeh, fuckin sickkk!!

I did exactly that, then went a step further and rounded it down to 1.... thought it was really smart at that time =.= feel like an idoit now xD

:S i had my answer as 1.21, but then said that rounding to the nearest whole statue would equal 1 statue. sooo, likely to lose a mark for that?

[m@tty]

Yeah, I'd say so.