Difference between revisions of "Talk:1154: Resolution"
(Added comment) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Humans seem to have a biological mechanism to bypass this conundrum wherein we make linear extrapolations or use weak induction for situations where there is insufficient data.[[Special:Contributions/208.98.237.225|208.98.237.225]] 22:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC) | Humans seem to have a biological mechanism to bypass this conundrum wherein we make linear extrapolations or use weak induction for situations where there is insufficient data.[[Special:Contributions/208.98.237.225|208.98.237.225]] 22:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I took this to be a reference to infinite loops because of "being stuck" "thinking I'm fixing things about myself", "break out of loops", and "not making progress". --[[Special:Contributions/68.75.178.240|68.75.178.240]] 00:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 00:28, 1 January 2013
It's good! But self-explanatory? -- St.nerol (talk) 16:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
The reference to a single data point may reference a common problem in "long-term" or "one-off" observations - that statistical significance can probably never be achieved because of the labour involved in creating individual data points. In this case Cueball essentially makes one data point per year (or many depending on whether you consider individual observations to happen throughout the year...), and thusly one year is insufficient to determine if there is a large "yearly" loop with nested daily/weekly loops.
Humans seem to have a biological mechanism to bypass this conundrum wherein we make linear extrapolations or use weak induction for situations where there is insufficient data.208.98.237.225 22:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I took this to be a reference to infinite loops because of "being stuck" "thinking I'm fixing things about myself", "break out of loops", and "not making progress". --68.75.178.240 00:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
