Scribd Logo
Unggah

Selamat datang di Scribd!

  • Why The Dimensionless Mathematical Ratio Pi Occurs in The Gauss Distribution Law

    Diunggah oleh

    Nige Cook
    18 tayangan1 halaman
    Why the dimensionless mathematical ratio Pi occurs in the Gauss distribution law http://vixra.org/abs/1403.0948 Just a quick comment here to forestall anyone who brings up subjective IQ test scores and the "bell curve" normal distribution: all real data in such curves contains deviations from the Gaussian curve! You also get the Gaussian curve used in log-normal curves for instances where the normal distribution fails. People, in other words, first select the gauss distribution as the best fit to some data, and then they try to argue that it is a divine mystery of the universe that the factor Pi in the formula is related to intelligence scores! But that's a circular argument! You've fiddled the selection bias by your original determination that gauss's law (containing Pi) is the best distribution to use (rather than, say, the low-normal distribution) and then you are trying to claim that nature is telling you Pi exists in IQ scores. It's just crazy delusion. Furthermore, the real world deviations of extensive data from the Gauss curve are simply brushed off as anomalies or "skews in data"! So there is no objective evidence whatsoever for Pi to mysteriously exist in non-geometric applications, without any simple explanation. Take Euler's simple formula, i^i = exp(-Pi/2). Here, the derivation of the equation requires geometric and trigonometric factors, so you again have a simple reason why the factor Pi is present. There's no mumbo-jumbo here. Statistics is badly corrupted by the use of non-mechanistic, false, simplistic Gaussian applications. For example, medical statistics uses probit analysis (cumulative Gaussian distributions) to model dose-response relationships like the percentage of rats killed as a function of dose of drug or radiation. But this is tied into the exp(-Pi x^2) form of the Gauss distribution, which is not a good mechanism and fails to model the details of dose-effects response relationships. The correct mortality response for a single-hit kill model is simply: Fraction killed, F = 1 - exp(- Dc) where D is dose, and c is a constant. But if you have the drug or the radiation affecting 2 similarly-vulnerable organ in the animal with a synergistic combined response, you might then get: Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^2 If the poison or radiation affects 3 critical organs (heart, lungs, and brain, for example): Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 Now, this result of F = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 is a mechanism-based SINGLE CONSTANT response model, and it makes different predictions to that from the probit analysis, which is just a generic approximation that has to be fiddled to the data using TWO separate constants (mean and standard deviation). So not only are Wigner and Gauss completely ignorant and wrong, but they are also a danger to medicine, by replacing mechanisms and good models with mathematically fiddled gibberish!

    Judul Asli

    Why the dimensionless mathematical ratio Pi occurs in the Gauss distribution law

    Hak Cipta

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Format Tersedia

    PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

    Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

    Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

    Laporkan Dokumen Ini
    Why the dimensionless mathematical ratio Pi occurs in the Gauss distribution law http://vixra.org/abs/1403.0948 Just a quick comment here to forestall anyone who brings up subjective IQ test scores and the "bell curve" normal distribution: all real data in such curves contains deviations from the Gaussian curve! You also get the Gaussian curve used in log-normal curves for instances where the normal distribution fails. People, in other words, first select the gauss distribution as the best fit to some data, and then they try to argue that it is a divine mystery of the universe that the factor Pi in the formula is related to intelligence scores! But that's a circular argument! You've fiddled the selection bias by your original determination that gauss's law (containing Pi) is the best distribution to use (rather than, say, the low-normal distribution) and then you are trying to claim that nature is telling you Pi exists in IQ scores. It's just crazy delusion. Furthermore, the real world deviations of extensive data from the Gauss curve are simply brushed off as anomalies or "skews in data"! So there is no objective evidence whatsoever for Pi to mysteriously exist in non-geometric applications, without any simple explanation. Take Euler's simple formula, i^i = exp(-Pi/2). Here, the derivation of the equation requires geometric and trigonometric factors, so you again have a simple reason why the factor Pi is present. There's no mumbo-jumbo here. Statistics is badly corrupted by the use of non-mechanistic, false, simplistic Gaussian applications. For example, medical statistics uses probit analysis (cumulative Gaussian distributions) to model dose-response relationships like the percentage of rats killed as a function of dose of drug or radiation. But this is tied into the exp(-Pi x^2) form of the Gauss distribution, which is not a good mechanism and fails to model the details of dose-effects response relationships. The correct mortality response for a single-hit kill model is simply: Fraction killed, F = 1 - exp(- Dc) where D is dose, and c is a constant. But if you have the drug or the radiation affecting 2 similarly-vulnerable organ in the animal with a synergistic combined response, you might then get: Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^2 If the poison or radiation affects 3 critical organs (heart, lungs, and brain, for example): Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 Now, this result of F = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 is a mechanism-based SINGLE CONSTANT response model, and it makes different predictions to that from the probit analysis, which is just a generic approximation that has to be fiddled to the data using TWO separate constants (mean and standard deviation). So not only are Wigner and Gauss completely ignorant and wrong, but they are also a danger to medicine, by replacing mechanisms and good models with mathematically fiddled gibberish!

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    18 tayangan1 halaman

    Why The Dimensionless Mathematical Ratio Pi Occurs in The Gauss Distribution Law

    Diunggah oleh

    Nige Cook
    Why the dimensionless mathematical ratio Pi occurs in the Gauss distribution law http://vixra.org/abs/1403.0948 Just a quick comment here to forestall anyone who brings up subjective IQ test scores and the "bell curve" normal distribution: all real data in such curves contains deviations from the Gaussian curve! You also get the Gaussian curve used in log-normal curves for instances where the normal distribution fails. People, in other words, first select the gauss distribution as the best fit to some data, and then they try to argue that it is a divine mystery of the universe that the factor Pi in the formula is related to intelligence scores! But that's a circular argument! You've fiddled the selection bias by your original determination that gauss's law (containing Pi) is the best distribution to use (rather than, say, the low-normal distribution) and then you are trying to claim that nature is telling you Pi exists in IQ scores. It's just crazy delusion. Furthermore, the real world deviations of extensive data from the Gauss curve are simply brushed off as anomalies or "skews in data"! So there is no objective evidence whatsoever for Pi to mysteriously exist in non-geometric applications, without any simple explanation. Take Euler's simple formula, i^i = exp(-Pi/2). Here, the derivation of the equation requires geometric and trigonometric factors, so you again have a simple reason why the factor Pi is present. There's no mumbo-jumbo here. Statistics is badly corrupted by the use of non-mechanistic, false, simplistic Gaussian applications. For example, medical statistics uses probit analysis (cumulative Gaussian distributions) to model dose-response relationships like the percentage of rats killed as a function of dose of drug or radiation. But this is tied into the exp(-Pi x^2) form of the Gauss distribution, which is not a good mechanism and fails to model the details of dose-effects response relationships. The correct mortality response for a single-hit kill model is simply: Fraction killed, F = 1 - exp(- Dc) where D is dose, and c is a constant. But if you have the drug or the radiation affecting 2 similarly-vulnerable organ in the animal with a synergistic combined response, you might then get: Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^2 If the poison or radiation affects 3 critical organs (heart, lungs, and brain, for example): Fraction killed, F = [1 - exp(- Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] [1 - exp (-Dc)] = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 Now, this result of F = [1 - exp(-Dc)]^3 is a mechanism-based SINGLE CONSTANT response model, and it makes different predictions to that from the probit analysis, which is just a generic approximation that has to be fiddled to the data using TWO separate constants (mean and standard deviation). So not only are Wigner and Gauss completely ignorant and wrong, but they are also a danger to medicine, by replacing mechanisms and good models with mathematically fiddled gibberish!

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    dari 1

    Why the dimensionless mathematical ratio Pi occurs in the Gauss distribution law Nigel B. Cook, 27 March 2014 www.quantumfieldtheory.

    org

    The occurrence of pi in formulae apparently unrelated to geometry was used by Eugene Wigner in his 1960 paper The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences. Wigner's example is the Gaussian/normal distribution law, which is an example of obfuscation. Laplace (1782), Gauss (1809), Maxwell (1860) and Fisher (1915) wrote the normal exponential distribution with the square root of pi in the normalization outside the integral. But Stigler in 1982 rewrote the equation with pi in the exponent, making the formula look less mysterious because the exponent is then the area of a circle (in other words, Poisson's exponential distribution, adapted to circular areas, with areas expressed in dimensionless form); if you think of the use of the normal distribution to model CEP error probabilities for missiles landing around a target point (H. Kahn, On Thermonuclear War, 1960, appendix):

    So theres really no mystery at all. Its a terrific example of how thinking about military applications of mathematics undermines the dogmatic prejudices that reside at the heart of so-called pure mathematic, which is sheer ignorance, enforced by censorship and coercion from on-high.

    Anda mungkin juga menyukai