3 ms·

Variance in Science is the square of the standard deviation. Since you are talking about a scientific issue, and discussing measurements, and since you claim t

Variance in Science is the square of the standard deviation. Since you are talking about a scientific issue, and discussing measurements, and since you claim to have a BSc it is reasonable to expect the word to be used in a technical context. All history is recorded history BY DEFINITION. You shouldn't be waving your degree around, you plainly are not a scientist. As to your understanding of this, consider tossing a coin, and getting heads. For one coin it's a 1/2 chance. For 2 in a row it's 1/4. For 100 the chance is 1/(2^100) which is about 10^-30, a vanishingly small chance. Now let's take the last 100 years of climate data from phoenix, we can estimate the chance of any day being over 100F from the data, and from that the chance of 100 days straight of over 100F. Given that less than half of the time it's over 100F in Phoenix, the odds of having 100 days in a row over 100F is less than 10^-30. This is 1st year science. Your very first data analysis course.

avazhi 2y ago
Variance as used in statistics is esoteric and technical and no reasonable person would expect it to be used as a technical or esoteric term unless the surrounding context required it. Given the generality of my original comment and the clear lack of any indication that I was using the term in its statistical sense, you are way off the mark. Less pedantically, the problem with your example is that you have (really rather hilariously) taken the past century as your reference point, and that’s exactly (no really, EXACTLY) the problem. For all you know 1900-2000 was atypical. The fact that you couldn’t see the irony in what you were thinking before you typed it all out is telling. Not sure what else to tell you. You are correct that I’m not a scientist by profession, though - I have a BSc and an LLB from a G8 school. I don’t use my BSc professionally. That fact has no bearing on my ability to use words for their plain meaning, though, or to understand basic scoentific concepts. Have a good day, mate.

avazhi 2y ago

Variance as used in statistics is esoteric and technical and no reasonable person would expect it to be used as a technical or esoteric term unless the surrounding context required it. Given the generality of my original comment and the clear lack of any indication that I was using the term in its statistical sense, you are way off the mark. Less pedantically, the problem with your example is that you have (really rather hilariously) taken the past century as your reference point, and that’s exactly (no really, EXACTLY) the problem. For all you know 1900-2000 was atypical. The fact that you couldn’t see the irony in what you were thinking before you typed it all out is telling. Not sure what else to tell you. You are correct that I’m not a scientist by profession, though - I have a BSc and an LLB from a G8 school. I don’t use my BSc professionally. That fact has no bearing on my ability to use words for their plain meaning, though, or to understand basic scoentific concepts. Have a good day, mate.