There is no simple answer to the question because the children's genders are not independent events. They depend on the parents' ages and their genes.
However, if you assume that they are independent events then, the probability that the next seven births are girls (given that the global probability of a girl is 0.48), is 0.00614 approx.
Assuming that the births at the hospital are equally likely to be of either gender then the answer is (1/2)4 = 1/16
Oh, dude, the probability of the next child being a girl is still 50/50. Each birth is like a coin flip - it doesn't matter what came before. So, you could have a dozen girls in a row and the next one could still be a girl. It's all just random chance, man.
Assuming that the chance of a woman giving birth to a boy or a girl is the same (in reality there's about 105 boys born for every 100 girls) then the probability of 22 of the same gender births *in a row* is: P=(0.5)^22=0.0000002384 or 1 in 4,194,304 It depends on the "when" of the question. If you point at a childless woman, and say "She will give birth to 22 children. What is the likelyhood that they will all be girls?" In that case the probability will be one in two-to-the-twenty-second. Pretty long odds. BUT, if you point at a woman with twenty one children, and ask "What are the odds that the next one will be a girl?" Then the answer is one in two. Make sense?
There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.
The answer will depend on the exact situation.If you are dealt a single card, the probability of that single card not being a queen is 12/13 - assuming you have no knowledge about the other cards.Here is another example. If you already hold three queens in your hand (and no other cards have been dealt), the probability of the next card being dealt being a queen is 1/49, so the probability of NOT getting a queen is 48/49 - higher than in the previous example.
Assuming that the births at the hospital are equally likely to be of either gender then the answer is (1/2)4 = 1/16
Oh, dude, the probability of the next child being a girl is still 50/50. Each birth is like a coin flip - it doesn't matter what came before. So, you could have a dozen girls in a row and the next one could still be a girl. It's all just random chance, man.
Assuming that the chance of a woman giving birth to a boy or a girl is the same (in reality there's about 105 boys born for every 100 girls) then the probability of 22 of the same gender births *in a row* is: P=(0.5)^22=0.0000002384 or 1 in 4,194,304 It depends on the "when" of the question. If you point at a childless woman, and say "She will give birth to 22 children. What is the likelyhood that they will all be girls?" In that case the probability will be one in two-to-the-twenty-second. Pretty long odds. BUT, if you point at a woman with twenty one children, and ask "What are the odds that the next one will be a girl?" Then the answer is one in two. Make sense?
There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.There is not enough information on the propensity for the parents to have a child of either gender and so it is necessary to assume that the probability of the gender of the next child is independent of the genders of preceding children. In that case the probability of the next child being a girl is 1/2.
Probability theory can be used to estimate the risks of genetic traits being passed down to the next generation.
There's not enough data to answer this in terms of experimental probability, but there's a 1/2 chance of the next customer being a woman.
If the gender of a child were an independent variable then the genders of the existing children would be irrelevant and so the probability of the next child being a girl would be approximately 1/2.It would be approximately 1/2 because the overall proportion is not exactly half. However, and more important, is the fact that the gender of a child is affected by the parents' genes and so is not independent of the gender of previous children.
According to the Social Security Administration, Jessica was the most popular baby name for a girl in the U.S. in 1990 with 46,459 births. Ashley, Brittany, Amanda and Samantha were the next most popular baby names for girls that year.
According to the Social Security Administration, Emily was the most popular baby name for a girl in the U.S. in 1999 with 26,534 births. Hannah, Alexis, Sarah and Samantha were the next most popular baby names for girls that year.
According to the Social Security Administration, Jessica was the most popular baby name for a girl in the U.S. in 1988 with 51,506 births. Ashley, Amanda, Sarah and Jennifer were the next most popular baby names for girls that year.
According to the Social Security Administration, Isabella was the most popular baby name for a girl in the U.S. in 2009 with 22,067 births. Emma, Olivia, Sophia and Ava were the next most popular baby names for girls that year.
According to the Social Security Administration, Jessica was the most popular girl baby name in the U.S. in 1987 with 55,988 births. Ashley, Amanda, Jennifer, and Sarah were the next most popular baby names for girls that year.