Wiki User
∙ 10y agoIt is not possible to give a proper answer to the question for two main reasons. The first reason is that the probability of boys and girls are not equal. The global probability, at birth is 0.517 for boys and 0.483 for girls. Second, the children's genders are not independent events. Third, the gender ratios change with the parents' (mother's) age.
If you choose to ignore all these facts, then the probability is (1/2)4 = 1/16
Wiki User
∙ 10y agoSince the probability of having a son is about 1/2, the probability of the first 4 children being boys is about (1/2)4.
There is no simple answer to the question because children's gender are not independent events: they depend on the parents' ages and their genes. However, if you assume that the events then, the probability of a daughter is approx 0.48
Make a punnet square with the mother above, her genotype would be: X^B X^b, and the father to the left whose genotype is X^b Y.The probability of having a colorblind CHILD is 50%. The probability of them having a SON is 50%. Since we are asked what the probability of their SON being colorblind, it is 50% as well. The reason is because the chance of having a colorblind son, among sons only, (according to the punnet square) is 50%.
50%. Its the law of the land, or God.
It has Before every state would have their own currency. By: The Sons of Plunder
Since the probability of having a son is about 1/2, the probability of the first 4 children being boys is about (1/2)4.
you have to say it in a certain sentance.
In general, the probability that any child will be a girl is approximately 1 in 2. It is like flipping a coin. There is a 50-50 chance for a specific outcome each time. It would be less likely that a woman would have three sons than that she have two sons and one daughter, but each individual outcome is a 50-50 chance. If this is a brain teaser, since we are given that the woman has given birth to two sons, it could imply that any other children she has are daughters, in which case the probability is 100% - if we know that she has other children.
There is no historical evidence to suggest that Charlemagne killed his sons. Charlemagne was known for his efforts to ensure a peaceful succession by dividing his empire among his sons and setting up a system of co-rulership.
Elizabeth was the elder daughter of King George VI who had no sons. As there were no sons the laws of succession allow for a female to succeed.
In the war of succession that followed the death of Aurangzeb, Prince Muazzam came out to be successful, who ascended the throne under the title Bahadur Shah (1707-1712).
Strictly speaking, it is not. It is a Presidential Dictatorship. However, the method of presidential succession is monarchical, in that sons replace fathers as Presidents.
that all depends on which facts you acknowledge as a priori state for this situation.
Sons would be plural and son's is possessive. Tickyul
50-50
i know a couple: bob nolan, pat brady
There is no simple answer to the question because children's gender are not independent events: they depend on the parents' ages and their genes. However, if you assume that the events then, the probability of a daughter is approx 0.48