Is it possible to build two dice such that the sum of the two dice follows an uniform distribution on $\{2,\dots,12\}$ ?

EDIT : Both dice must have sides 1-6, but the probability that the dice falls on a face can be chosen.

I am looking for a solution that gives the answer and a somewhat detailed reasoning, even though it might seem really easy for some people. I have some difficulties understanding how to solve that kind of problems (what method to follow), any comment towards that issue would be welcomed.

  • $\begingroup$ Must the two dice be identical to each other? (P.S. 'dice', not 'dices', is plural of die). $\endgroup$
    – lemon
    Dec 1, 2014 at 11:44
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You can use the dice ${0,0,0,6,6,6}$ and ${1,2,3,4,5,6}$. I can't really give a good explanation how I got it though, it just popped up in my head. $\endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Dec 1, 2014 at 11:45
  • $\begingroup$ Sure. Each die is in the shape of a regular dodecahedron. One die has sides numberd from $1$ to $12$, the other has $0$ on every side. $\endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 1, 2014 at 11:46
  • $\begingroup$ Sum $1$ is impossible by definition. $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2014 at 19:05
  • $\begingroup$ @barakmanos Sorry that was a typo $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2014 at 19:13

1 Answer 1


Let $a_i, b_i\in[0,1]$ be the probabilities that die $A, B$ shows $i+1$. (According to the edit, $i$ can only range over $\{0,1,2,3,4,5\}$ for both dice). Let $f(z)=\sum a_iz^i$ and $g(z)=\sum b_i z^i$. Then the desired result is that $$f(z)g(z)=\sum_{j=0}^{10}\frac1{11}z^j,$$ a polynomial without real roots. Hence both $f$ and $g$ have no real roots, i.e. they must both have even degree. This implies $a_5=b_5=0$ and the the coefficient of $z^{10}$ in their product is also $0$, contradiction.

Remark: Why does $h(z)=\sum_{j=0}^{10}z^j$ not have real roots? We have $h(z)=\frac{1-z^{11}}{1-z}$ and the numerator has only one real root at $z=1$. But that is no root of $h$.

  • $\begingroup$ Each dice can have values 1-6, not 0-5 :) (That doesn't affect your reasoning, but I thought you might want to edit it) $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2014 at 19:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Hippalectryon That's why $a_i$ is the probability that the die shows $i\color{red}{+1}$. This shifting got rid of a factor of $z^2$ and hence justifies the no-real-roots claim $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2014 at 20:33
  • $\begingroup$ @Hagen von Eitzen In case without shifting ($i \in \{0..6\})$ you can set $a_0=0, b_0=0$ and the convolution $f(z)g(z) = z^2 \cdot h(z)$, where $0$ is a single root of $f$ and a single root of $g$. The rest of the reasoning follows ($a_6 = b_6 = 0$). Is that correct? $\endgroup$ Apr 2, 2019 at 11:48
  • $\begingroup$ what is z, f(z) and g(z)? $\endgroup$
    – dksahuji
    Mar 24, 2020 at 10:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.