Re: independent variables - ln
- From: J W <julianw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 13:55:58 -0800
rastompk@xxxxxxxxx wrote:Hi there,
If x1,...,xn are random independent variables,
it is true that ln(x1),...,ln(xn) are also independent?
I substituted "independent random variables" for "random independent variables" in the above, in which case I believe my response is correct.
I thought that QUESTION wss so infantile that was not worth
even a one line comment, such as:
What is the meaning of your "independent" in
"random indepdent variables"?
I would argue that *all* serious questions, no matter how trivial, are worthy of a reply. The question posed seemed plain enough to me, and I think we risk driving the statistically curious away if we demand that posters to this group phrase (or re-phrase) queries in technically correct, completely unambiguous language. The very reason most part-timers stop here is because they're *uncomfortable* with statistics and statistical language!
That being said, perhaps I should have clarified my assumptions about the question being asked (i.e. independent = statistically independent) in my response.
-J
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: independent variables - ln
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: independent variables - ln
- References:
- independent variables - ln
- From: rastompk
- Re: independent variables - ln
- From: J W
- Re: independent variables - ln
- From: Reef Fish
- Re: independent variables - ln
- From: Bob O'Hara
- Re: independent variables - ln
- From: Reef Fish
- independent variables - ln
- Prev by Date: ISIPTA '07 Call For Papers
- Next by Date: Re: Rolling up variance
- Previous by thread: Re: independent variables - ln
- Next by thread: Re: independent variables - ln
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|