How Can 10 Men and 5 Women Be Arranged in Couples to Maintain Original Order?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pjunky
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Women
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around arranging 10 men and 5 women in couples while maintaining their original order when reversed. The initial arrangement is specified as M M W W M M M M W M M W M M, and the goal is to form pairs like MW MW MW MW MW, resulting in a sequence of men followed by women. Participants question the permutations needed to achieve this arrangement and the significance of the original order condition. Clarification is sought on whether interchanging two men in the original sequence constitutes a different order or remains the same. The complexity of the arrangement process and its implications on the original order are central to the discussion.
pjunky
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
let there are
10 men and 5 women
if they are standing in a particular order

M M W W M M M M W M M W M M =Z

we have to arrange them in couples.

like this MW MW MW MW MW; MMMMMM =X

condition:-
if you reverse the process, you have to get the given original order=Z

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And the question is what?
What permutations do we need to do? Or in how many possible ways we can do this?
I would expect the latter, but then the "condition" doesn't make sense to me (for information about the process is not relevant)

Also, you said "they are standing in a particular order". Does this mean that we can identify the separate men and women? So, for example, interchanging the first two people in the row (which are both men), does that give a different order or is it the same?
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K