On 22 Jun 99, at 20:55, Lang Pal wrote:
> I recommend to replace the expression " (3/2)^n " by "
> (PI*SQRT(2))/3". Then
> we receive
> 1,480960969 instead of 3/2 and the correlation coefficient would be
> almost
> just the same
> (0,996117397). Why then to replace?
Well, we're dealing with experimental data, and both look about
equally good. On balance I prefer the argument with pi in it. Pi
deserves a place in most fundamental laws...
(Much waving of arms ... obviously a beautiful solution isn't always
right)
Regards
Brian Beesley
________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
