Re: Do you want it?
- From: "Greg Heath" <heath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Aug 2006 03:55:04 -0700
Reef Fish wrote:
Greg Heath wrote:
Greg Heath wrote:
Reef Fish wrote:
Greg Heath wrote:
Reef Fish wrote:
Greg Heath wrote:
Reef Fish wrote:
I think Greg's attention span is good only for a few lines. So, I'll
snip all except those few line:
I think the emphasis in a "sample variance" is that it is obtained from
a SAMPLE of data values. The criterion of estimation does not
alter the fact that they are all called "sample variance", as a short
for of "sample estimate of the population sigma under criterion #".
What modifications to above discussion result when the population
mean, M, is known and the unbiased estimate for the covariance
matrix is
S = Sum(Xi-M)(Xi-M)'/N ?
Hope this helps.
You should snip that line from your sig file. What you post seldom
helps anyone.
That's debatable.
In this case, you're asking a question that is already
answered.
I inferred that it had been answered. However, I can't find where it
had been directly asked. Therefore I made it a point to get a direct
answer to a direct question. In particular,
"Does any part of the sample variance discussion change when
the population mean is used instead of the sample mean?"
Simple direct question asked.
Simple direct answer expected, i.e., either "No" or "Yes, because ...".
A bit too advanced for you to figure out the logic, isn't it, that the
answer is "NO" ?
I figured the answer had to be NO. However, I was not absolutely
100% sure. Therefore, for my benefit as well as others, I wanted
a direct answer.
You S came from a SAMPLE didn't it?
Of course. However, that's not the point. See the word SAMPLE?
But that WAS the whole point.
That was YOUR point...which was well made. However, I
was trying to clarify a condition upon which previous replies
"appeared" to be based (if not from you, then someone else).
OK. Twice used by Jack the OP.
Then you should have asked Jack, and not MY post which
emphasized only the SAMPLE aspects of it, and then make
more noise about it.
Sorry, I didn't realize that you couldn't think outside of your
own little box.
Namely, the repeated phrase "when the population mean is
unknown". If that phrase deserved to be repeated, then
certainly the clarification that nothing changes when the
population mean is used is worthwhile.
Jack can answer you himself. But since your team-mate
Afonso
Hey! You two have been dancing together for quite some time.
I have never tried to tap you on the shoulder in the past...and
never will in the future. That's one domestic disturbance I
want no part of.
was fixated at N being the "sample variance", and
nothing else, I think Jack's point has to do with the 1 d.f.
difference between whether the population mean is known
or unknown.
I'm sure it was.
That is why they are ALL called SAMPLE variances, for short.
Yep.
That's why your questions to MY statement were all irrelevant.
No, they weren't. Jack made some points and you made some
more followup points. My question applied to both of you.
Given your HISTORY of being able to drag out the simple
correlation question for months (when you were wrong throughout),
I think the best course (for both of us) is for you NOT to ask ME
any questions, and if you ask, I'll just ignore it.
Your loss. Your free tuition has been withdrawn.
Oh, no, I am crushed. You are the most knowledgable of
everyone who ever posted to the sci.stat.* groups.
How will I ever find the correct answer to any of my questions
if you don't reply?
Do you think ignoring my questions will make you feel better?
Oh, that's right. You're ignoring my questions.
HOWEVER, when you make statistical errors, like those made
by Afonso and others, you'll be treated equally, in order for the
innocent readers NOT to be led astray by your mistakes.
What a relief. I couldn't stand it if I knew you were never going
to reply to any of my posts.
See ya.
Greg
.
- References:
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Jack Tomsky
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Greg Heath
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Greg Heath
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Greg Heath
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Greg Heath
- Re: Do you want it?
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: Do you want it?
- Prev by Date: BOB LING, A MISERABLE FORGER
- Next by Date: To fail to reject the null Hypotheses is NOT to have EQUALITY
- Previous by thread: Re: Do you want it?
- Next by thread: population question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
