on the fact that our students are taught basic skills are less, wanted to point out another article from the series Entalphabetisierung. One of the skills on which is the weak point is the ability to calculate an arithmetic mean. But even many professors do not have this ability! They not even understand the principle behind it! Therefore, the deficiency can not be longer than a manifestation of the "normal" Entalphabetisierung (and certainly should not be normal!) . Consider It must be, therefore, a symptom of a much deeper and more inexorable decline! Not only in the increasing number of military conflicts around the world, but also in such "little things" we note that we are in Kali-yuga (कलियुग) are located. The Kali-yuga (कलियुग) can not stop or even turn back, after all it is a force of nature. But that is no reason to close our eyes and before the side issues, which should not necessarily be. Why can calculate the arithmetic mean not to teach? Or at least the principle behind it? Are people already stupid so far? Alas, many readers now find that the arithmetic mean is so easy to understand that they see what is reported here simply can not believe it? Well, then we proceed to an example.
representative of the guild of journalists like to say that people were getting older. Representatives of the journals will even claim that people would live longer. In this case, it would have both guilds not easy, if they wanted reliable information because they find themselves scientists rarely useful on the subject. The journalists, we take time out from the outside, because older means Finally, no more words, more as sicker or scientific multimorbid. The Journaille and the incompetent scientists refer to as life expectancy known, statistically determined number Unfortunately even many of today's scientists are not able to read a statistic or interpret reasonably correct. Not even if the statistics indicate only an arithmetic mean, it's enough for them! Otherwise, the scientists knew that journalists and soon all the other people understood that it is the life expectancy of no more than a statistical measure of the infant mortality rate! We expect you an example. One survivor had been eighty four siblings, but all four survived only five years (for many of the modern era before it was a normal rate of dead siblings). As you probably know (or not), we get the arithmetic mean of the life of a total of five people, as we count up the number of years and then divide by the number of people. (Even the person were overwhelmed? The first probably already have requested to come to five people. So I expect the end for you.) Eighty plus five plus five plus five plus five makes a hundred. The divided by five, because there are five people, makes twenty. The Life expectancy during the lifetime of the five people was twenty years. But to get to a life expectancy of twenty years, was one of the people live necessarily eighties! Everyone is now clear who has understood the arithmetic mean.
Now by the technically expert comes the objection that statistics always needs a large number, so that a sample of five people far too small. True, but a single woman can not get a lot more children. So we must be satisfied within a family with numbers of this magnitude. Logically, is the statement that the life expectancy of five people alive in their families eight p.m. Years was. study for a whole family, a whole tribe or even an entire state or even world one must of course reached the years of life of many more people. This means that one must include in particular a lot more dead children. It also happened frequently that mothers died during the birth process. It also reduced the probability of survival of their first-born children. The larger the group under investigation, then, is there the greater the proportion of deceased children, please enter the number of life expectancy down. In order for earlier age at an average life expectancy of thirty years (one in the context often quoted figure) come to, there must have been necessarily people who lived ninety years, hundred years or even one hundred and twenty years. A life expectancy of thirty years meant that someone who had lived for thirty years, was regarded as by no means old, because he was accustomed to having people around him at least three times as long lived and accumulated three times as long illnesses. Increased life expectancy means nothing more than that the infant mortality rate has declined. Nevertheless, there are professors who try to tell you that people after thirty years earlier would have been old and not to live long had had. It follows that well must necessarily present a general idiocy! Nothing here should be further proved.
other hand, there are still people who understand the inability of their fellow men, statistics, rigorously exploit their overreaching. Of course, works only as long as they are better at it than their fellow human beings. Sun claims http://finanzcrash.com/forum/read.php?1, 56643.56737 # msg-56 737 that it's already are computer programs that figure out how to manipulate the results of statistical studies have so at the end of the desired information comes out. Perhaps it was deliberately Convey important basic skills taken out of the education system so that people can easily cheat? It is possible something in the Kali-yuga (कलियुग).
0 comments:
Post a Comment