Joshua Cude <[email protected]> wrote:
> As I wrote, it represents the probability that ALL of the replications >> were the result of error. >> > > > No it doesn't. That is true only if all the attempts give replications. > Look up the binomial distribution, and find someone to explain it to you. > I believe that would only apply if success or failure was random. It is not. When a cathode fails in a properly equipped lab, they always know why it failed. They can spot the defect. When there are no defects and all control parameters are met, it always works. So you need only look at the positive results, and estimate the likelihood that every one of them was caused by incompetent researchers making mistakes. (Or insane, or criminal researchers.) In 1989 there were many studies where the outcome was random. They did not know what the control parameters were, and they did not attempt to measure them. If you do not measure loading and perform other diagnostics you have no way of knowing whether it is working, or will work. It is like throwing darts in the dark and expecting to hit the target. - Jed
