Raul Miller wrote: > On 6/27/07, John Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It does not matter how accurate your model is except in the degenerate >> case of a constant distribution: \bar X is random variable, while \mu is >> a >> number. > > Well... I do use cases where X and \bar X have numeric value to test > that I understand the math properly.
This does not work. I have tried to emphasize that these are random variables, not numbers. > >> It makes no sense to talk about \mu and \bar X being equal. > > If they are not comparable I do not see why it makes sense to > talk about their difference. > Sure it does. Let X be the random variable counting the number of heads when 10 coins are tossed. Then Y=X-5 is a perfectly good random variable. > ... anyways, around here I'm not sure if it's worth > proceeding, because I worry that either you have made > assumptions I disagree with or I have made assumptions > you disagree with or both. > Maybe you are right. John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
