Math gurus...Is it possible to find the missing variable...
Lanfear Send a noteboard - 21/11/2012 05:12:24 PM
Hi all,
My question is how many standard deviations is Lanfear above the mean? Is she 4, 5, 6, or some other number? According to Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation, (see the chart in the middle of the page) we get the following probabilities:
4 SD = 99.993 666% or in other words, 1 / 15,787
5 SD = 99.999 942 6697% or in other words, 1 / 1,744,278
6 SD = 99.999 999 8027% or in other words, 1 / 506,797,346
Now, if you like round numbers then you might want to use the following (also taken from the same chart on Wikipedia):
1 out of 100,000 = 4.417 173 SD from the mean
1 out of 1,000,000 = 4.891 638 SD from the mean
1 out of 10,000,000 = 5.326 724 SD from the mean.
I don't know if it is possible for us to come to a consensus on where Lanfear is, that is, how many standard deviations is she above the mean. But if we know her level, by extrapolation we can also assign Morgase the exact opposite SD below the mean. Then we can assign Daigian and that should allow us to fill in everybody else.
Any insights are appreciated.
Thanks
My question is how many standard deviations is Lanfear above the mean? Is she 4, 5, 6, or some other number? According to Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation, (see the chart in the middle of the page) we get the following probabilities:
4 SD = 99.993 666% or in other words, 1 / 15,787
5 SD = 99.999 942 6697% or in other words, 1 / 1,744,278
6 SD = 99.999 999 8027% or in other words, 1 / 506,797,346
Now, if you like round numbers then you might want to use the following (also taken from the same chart on Wikipedia):
1 out of 100,000 = 4.417 173 SD from the mean
1 out of 1,000,000 = 4.891 638 SD from the mean
1 out of 10,000,000 = 5.326 724 SD from the mean.
I don't know if it is possible for us to come to a consensus on where Lanfear is, that is, how many standard deviations is she above the mean. But if we know her level, by extrapolation we can also assign Morgase the exact opposite SD below the mean. Then we can assign Daigian and that should allow us to fill in everybody else.
Any insights are appreciated.
Thanks
Some of you (Tor and Shannow) appear to be math gurus. I don't understand how to calculate a missing variable.
I do know, however, that in math if you have one unknown variable then you can solve the equation and find the answer. So please help me with the following calculation and tell me if it is possible to find the answer. I believe that in order for the math equation to work we have to make a few basic assumptions (and I understand that some of you may disagree with those assumptions). Please humor me for a minute and just help me see if it is possible to find an answer using the assumptions I put forth below.
Please take the following facts as true (for the purpose of the calculation): WoT world is like our own. Thus, 7 billion people. 3% can channel. Therefore, 210 million channelers. Half are men, half are women. Therefore, at any given time there are roughly 105 million women channelers.
Assumption: Morgase is the weakest channeler possible. Since she is 1 out of 105 million that makes her 5.730 729 SD below the mean. See the standard deviation chart on wikipedia that I linked to in the original post.
Assumption: The bell curve is symmetrical and not skewed in one direction or the other. I know some of you disagree (but please humor me for a minute).
Since I don't like strengths less than 0 what I want to do is assign Morgase a strength equal to 1 unit of power. If I assign Morgase 1 unit of power do I have enough information to figure out the mean? In other words if 1 unit of power is equivalent to 5.730 729 SD below the mean can't I figure out the mean? If so, what is the mean?
If it is impossible to figure out the mean using Morgase equal to 1 unit of power and Morgase equal to 5.730 729 SD below the mean, then what other variables need to be known in the math equation?
Thanks for your help.
How many standard deviations is Lanfear
- 15/11/2012 06:04:39 PM
1980 Views
Hmm...
- 15/11/2012 07:25:34 PM
1122 Views
see we CAN agree on stuff 
- 15/11/2012 07:56:12 PM
983 Views
- 18/11/2012 08:37:22 PM
889 Views
- 15/11/2012 07:56:12 PM
983 Views
- 18/11/2012 08:37:22 PM
889 Views
Re:
- 18/11/2012 11:07:17 PM
1078 Views
- 18/11/2012 11:07:17 PM
1078 Views
Re:
- 19/11/2012 05:16:00 AM
925 Views
- 19/11/2012 05:16:00 AM
925 Views
Re:
- 19/11/2012 03:13:01 PM
934 Views
- 19/11/2012 03:13:01 PM
934 Views
They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5%
- 19/11/2012 03:19:19 PM
907 Views
Re: They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5%
- 19/11/2012 04:01:43 PM
1140 Views
Re: They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5%
- 19/11/2012 09:04:04 PM
878 Views
Hmmm...
- 20/11/2012 02:08:40 AM
934 Views
Perhaps, but Egwene is also being a bit dramatic in the scene as she managed
- 20/11/2012 04:28:57 AM
905 Views
Nope...
- 20/11/2012 03:13:13 PM
936 Views
I believe she is being over dramatic
- 20/11/2012 03:26:24 PM
848 Views
Keep believing that...
- 20/11/2012 03:30:14 PM
972 Views
*shrugs*
- 20/11/2012 03:49:10 PM
922 Views
Tired and forkroot are the same now?
- 20/11/2012 03:55:22 PM
844 Views
No it's the literary device
- 20/11/2012 04:04:28 PM
957 Views
Impossible. Daigian is exactly 0.32SD below the mean
- 19/11/2012 11:06:04 AM
889 Views
You keep saying that, but it is either a linear or a non-linear distribution
- 19/11/2012 09:09:32 PM
945 Views
That's the whole point. Thanks for finally seeing it.
- 19/11/2012 09:43:27 PM
902 Views
keep believing that ... but you making up numbers isn't really relevant *NM*
- 20/11/2012 04:29:44 AM
619 Views
Please show me a number that is made up. The 0.32SD for Daigian is a rule of statistics.
- 20/11/2012 07:15:48 AM
872 Views
Ugh. I hate power level discussions. For real world applications, it should be kind of meaningless
- 16/11/2012 10:28:49 PM
876 Views
I don't really agree
- 18/11/2012 08:40:53 PM
821 Views
Perhaps, but we've seen that a MUCH weaker Channeler can win in a duel
- 19/11/2012 09:13:48 PM
886 Views
Re: Perhaps, but we've seen that a MUCH weaker Channeler can win in a duel
- 20/11/2012 08:10:01 AM
862 Views
Since I've proven that it's not a normal distribution in units of absolute strength, SDs don't apply
- 17/11/2012 07:48:21 PM
908 Views
You have proven nothing, except that you have an opinion *NM*
- 18/11/2012 02:21:35 AM
605 Views
You simply don't get it. It is mathematically a fact. There is no opinion involved.
- 18/11/2012 02:19:40 PM
751 Views
Only because you've assigned numeric values. That you created.
- 18/11/2012 02:40:51 PM
868 Views
It doesn't matter what figure you use...
- 18/11/2012 03:01:56 PM
764 Views
What if Daigian is one third Lanfear's strength?
- 18/11/2012 04:37:58 PM
890 Views
Sure you can
- 18/11/2012 10:09:31 PM
920 Views
Re: Sure you can
- 18/11/2012 10:54:50 PM
867 Views
You're right, though its 37.5%
- 19/11/2012 12:21:29 AM
835 Views
Oops, typo!
- 19/11/2012 02:54:25 AM
907 Views
Again, not possible, due to Daigian being just 0.3SD below the Mean
- 19/11/2012 08:37:01 AM
833 Views
Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys...
- 19/11/2012 04:05:12 PM
797 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys...
- 19/11/2012 05:55:02 PM
733 Views
Egwene is about as strong as Melaine and Amys combined
- 19/11/2012 09:19:50 PM
849 Views
Re: Egwene is about as strong as Melaine and Amys combined
- 20/11/2012 02:11:26 AM
861 Views
Forkroot in every case
- 20/11/2012 04:32:26 AM
846 Views
No!
- 20/11/2012 03:15:16 PM
839 Views
I'm not going to go re-read the books to you on this
- 20/11/2012 03:39:46 PM
845 Views
You need to read it for yourself, since you're completely confused.
- 20/11/2012 03:54:26 PM
811 Views
Not going to argue this with you.
- 20/11/2012 04:09:44 PM
784 Views
Your own example disproved your point...
- 20/11/2012 04:39:25 PM
864 Views
let's see, she's both asleep and would need hours to regain her strength
- 20/11/2012 04:43:17 PM
775 Views
Enough!
- 20/11/2012 05:04:06 PM
852 Views
LOL ... whatever. You go on believing that ... no one else sees it this way. *NM*
- 20/11/2012 05:20:52 PM
589 Views
Re: Your own example disproved your point...
- 20/11/2012 05:10:15 PM
902 Views
Barasine + Katerine isn't that much less than
- 20/11/2012 05:26:31 PM
900 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys...
- 20/11/2012 02:26:47 AM
777 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys...
- 20/11/2012 09:03:40 AM
832 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys...
- 20/11/2012 02:59:08 PM
876 Views
None of this is backed by any evidence...
- 20/11/2012 03:24:12 PM
778 Views
who said Cadsuane was 1.5x Moiraine or more?
- 20/11/2012 04:03:13 PM
792 Views
Nope...
- 20/11/2012 04:41:35 PM
832 Views
wrong
- 20/11/2012 04:48:50 PM
764 Views
Better evidence? LOL!
- 20/11/2012 03:18:55 PM
848 Views
Huh? How did you come to that conclusion?
- 20/11/2012 04:40:56 PM
836 Views
BEcause Cadsuane is close on the heels of Egwene?
- 20/11/2012 05:10:50 PM
744 Views
I'm not arguing that. I agree that Cadsuane is pretty close to Egwene
- 20/11/2012 05:50:34 PM
859 Views
Interesting, but let's go with your figures...
- 19/11/2012 06:54:54 AM
897 Views
Indeed
- 19/11/2012 08:16:44 AM
931 Views
Rand is sort of a special case
- 20/11/2012 04:25:02 AM
753 Views
Regarding Mesaana...
- 20/11/2012 08:42:56 AM
841 Views
You continue to mix two things
- 20/11/2012 03:24:44 PM
751 Views
No
- 20/11/2012 04:54:19 PM
981 Views
You are mistaken
- 20/11/2012 05:04:40 PM
827 Views
Probably, but the AS have no idea what 37.5% means
- 19/11/2012 02:59:26 AM
798 Views
It's irrelevant
- 19/11/2012 03:46:42 AM
837 Views
Agreed. Daigian is the marker of the absolute bottom of Aes Sedai strength.
- 19/11/2012 06:55:41 AM
812 Views
Daigian
- 19/11/2012 08:12:19 AM
851 Views
It is a direct marker due to RJ's quote
- 19/11/2012 08:50:26 AM
857 Views
You missed my point
- 19/11/2012 09:08:42 AM
810 Views
Asmodean would never have made the comment about 13 weakest AS
- 20/11/2012 04:41:11 AM
818 Views
Re: Asmodean would never have made the comment about 13 weakest AS
- 20/11/2012 09:07:49 AM
786 Views
Re: Sure you can
- 19/11/2012 09:22:09 AM
931 Views
Care to explain this...
- 19/11/2012 05:06:28 PM
789 Views
Indeed
- 20/11/2012 07:16:37 AM
1002 Views
Explained far better than I ever could. Bravo.
- 20/11/2012 07:30:29 AM
807 Views
Well duh.
- 20/11/2012 02:57:24 PM
920 Views
Incorrect.
- 20/11/2012 04:28:07 PM
908 Views
No
- 20/11/2012 04:44:16 PM
884 Views
You're integrating without lower limits...
- 20/11/2012 02:55:06 PM
860 Views
We are not talking about a normal distribution in any case
- 20/11/2012 04:44:24 AM
684 Views
Re: We are not talking about a normal distribution in any case
- 20/11/2012 07:02:47 AM
874 Views
You must tell me of this special math...
- 20/11/2012 03:10:09 PM
780 Views
Re: You must tell me of this special math...
- 20/11/2012 04:29:40 PM
815 Views
Morghase is a placeholder...
- 20/11/2012 04:45:42 PM
887 Views
Well...
- 18/11/2012 08:43:59 PM
932 Views
Re: Well...
- 19/11/2012 03:40:44 PM
899 Views
Wow.
- 19/11/2012 03:53:47 PM
935 Views
Well then you're both wrong I'm afraid
- 19/11/2012 06:09:36 PM
792 Views
Re: Well then you're both wrong I'm afraid
- 19/11/2012 07:42:58 PM
700 Views
this is why I think all of the Forsaken are very close in Power
- 20/11/2012 04:51:20 AM
888 Views
Re: this is why I think all of the Forsaken are very close in Power
- 20/11/2012 02:45:18 PM
829 Views
I think RJ went out of his way to keep strength a bit of a mystery
- 20/11/2012 08:42:44 PM
845 Views
Math gurus...Is it possible to find the missing variable...
- 21/11/2012 05:12:24 PM
830 Views
the problem is that the Mean is not going to tell us much really
- 22/11/2012 02:55:03 AM
907 Views
Re: the problem is that the Mean is not going to tell us much really
- 22/11/2012 03:15:33 AM
1186 Views
I do not think you can calculate the Mean without knowing the Units of Power
- 22/11/2012 03:53:59 AM
994 Views