3 ms·
Stupid comment. The quality of work of a very good scientist is not a random variable with an average being the same as the population average. Some scientists
by oneloop 10y ago
Stupid comment. The quality of work of a very good scientist is not a random variable with an average being the same as the population average. Some scientists are actually better than average. Stop trying to sound smart.
Now you could argue that IAS scientists were actually average, and they were just lucky enough to hit upon quality results before they went to IAS. In this case your comment could logically make sense. If that is what you believe, I will just assume that you know nothing about the world of research in the past 40 or so years (at least not in an area where IAS is world's best, like theoretical physics) during which the IAS produced some of the world's best research, as opposed to just having the scientists with the world's biggest reputations.
- thaumasiotes 10y agoYou have soundly demonstrated that you don't understand regression to the mean. The quality of work of a very good scientist is not a random variable with the average being the same as the population average. It is, however, a random variable with an idiosyncratic average, and that is sufficient to observe regression to the (individual) mean.
- oneloop 10y agoThe line of reasoning only attempts to make sense if you're talking about population mean. If you're talking about individual mean, it could still be a win to hire such individual of he's still above population average.