Re: Distribution of measurements in Setterfield's data

One important clarification that I overlooked -

The references to ">c" or "<c" in my post are to the
currently accepted value for c of approx. 299792 km/s.

Regards,
Shepherdmoon

On Sep 11, 12:09 am, shepherdm...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,

Here is a table I made based on the data available at the
link below at Lambert Dolphin's Library.

I'm curious about whether these results show anything
wrong or biases in Setterfield's presentation. For example,
if we take Setterfield's claim as the null hypothesis,
then we should be able to come up with a table like the
one below based on Setterfield's claim that the decay of c
follows a decay curve that he specifies.

But does the distribution below match the one expected if the
null hypothesis is true?

I'm a complete layman at math and statistics, so please
excuse me if there is nothing to this analysis. But I
thought it might be worth the effort if it can help to
show a definitive bias in Setterfield's presentation of
data.

Thanks,
Shepherdmoon

P.S. I did my best to format the table text to be aligned
in fixed-width text such as Courier. But there is no longer
a preview option on Google Groups, so I will have to learn
the results the hard way.

Distribution of sums and counts of c measurements and values,
based on Setterfield's published c data.

Sums of Measurements > c or < c
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sum of Measurements %
-------------------------------------------------------------
Total >c 50934 46.75% Total Measurements 108942
<c 58008 53.25%

Pre-1900 >c 37687 92.51% Total Pre-1900 40737
<c 3050 7.49%

Post-1900 >c 13247 19.42% Total Post-1900 68205
<c 54958 80.58%

Counts of c Values > c or < c
-------------------------------------------------------------
Count of c Values %
-------------------------------------------------------------
Total >c 126 60.87% Total c Values 207
<c 81 39.13%

Pre-1900 >c 77 68.14% Total Pre-1900 113
<c 36 31.86%

Post-1900 >c 49 52.13% Total Post-1900 94
<c 45 47.87%

SOURCE:
Cdata17.all data+cutshttp://www.ldolphin.org/allcdata17.xls


.

Relevant Pages

  • Distribution of measurements in Setterfields data
    ... follows a decay curve that he specifies. ... But does the distribution below match the one expected if the ... Distribution of sums and counts of c measurements and values, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Demonstration that least squares give maximum likelihood
    ... Call the measurements m, m, ..., m. ... mean m and standard deviation sigma. ... It is generally accepted in our field that you can usually assume normality, partly because the errors have multiple causes. ... Another responder alluded to concerns that - outliers apart - there are suspicions that the tips of the tails of real analytical data distributions are bigger and longer than the tails of the normal distribution. ...
    (sci.stat.edu)
  • Re: Obtaining an accurate resistor
    ... distribution, simply because averaging always reduces variance. ... Certainly increases the chance ... that it is closer to the mean of the original distribution, ... measurements suggest that is not the same as the nominal value. ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)
  • Re: Game Theory Nobel Prize Again and Beyond With PI
    ... mutations based on the Levy probability distribution," by Chang- ... the same distribution under sums goes to the "+" side of the ledger ... Readers who recall that the gamma distribution is ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: Distribution of measurements in Setterfields data
    ... Distribution of sums and counts of c measurements and values, ... The sample of estimates suffers from a selection bias. ...
    (talk.origins)