NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: "Vernier acuity" of horizon IC tests
From: Bill Morris
Date: 2009 Jul 10, 03:28 -0700
From: Bill Morris
Date: 2009 Jul 10, 03:28 -0700
Nicolas I hesitate to disagree with anyone about statistics, regarding it a kind of intellectual glue that gums up my brain. Loosely speaking, isn't the standard error of the mean at a given level an indicator of the probability that the _mean_ lies within a specified range? We would expect the distribution of the means to be smaller than the distribution of the samples. I took n to be 30, rather than 30-1, as 30 seemed to qualify as a "large sample." The 1.96 gives us exactly 95%, versus your 2 SD and 95.45% (in case anyone is confused about where the figures come from). You seem to be writing about the probability that a given _observation_ lies within a specified range. Bill Morris Pukenui New Zealand --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com To , email NavList-@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
