Proposed test - comments wanted
#15
(03-15-2015, 04:21 AM)Skywise Wrote: Look at it the other way. The real data is equally INsignificant as 6000 random dates.

I would then say that the proposition under test fails.

Brian

What I think this shows is that the average is not a good null hypothesis. These are mag 6+ quakes. They don't happen all that frequently so the sun-moon angle is erratic.

6000 random dates in 100 years is also erratic and gives a similar answer; the distribution does not fit the expected line.

Roger




Reply


Messages In This Thread
Proposed test - comments wanted - by Roger Hunter - 03-11-2015, 11:08 PM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-12-2015, 12:49 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-12-2015, 01:06 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-12-2015, 02:16 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-15-2015, 01:01 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-15-2015, 02:25 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Skywise - 03-15-2015, 04:21 AM
RE: Proposed test - comments wanted - by Roger Hunter - 03-15-2015, 12:32 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)