Function

Hmm yes, now that you mention it, I don't understand how Asperger's didn't come up in my mind earlier ...

Sidenote: I know you didn't mean to, but I find "Aspies" quite an offending term. Just be careful using pars pro totos in people with mental/psychological disorders.

"Because they lack the appropriate social reactions to others emotions, not because they don't have empathy."

So you insinuate that they do have a good sense for correct interpretation of others' emotions and feelings, but lack the ability to express the acknowledgement of that perception? I always thought they were simply not good in perceiving and interpreting, let alone take into account others' emotions, ergo, lack of empathy.

The domain of mental disorders (I don't like this term either, but that's just my fault) is quite fascinating, though difficult to handle, understand, and put into practise.

Even if, I find it very demanding.

So you are comparing 2 samples with a null hypothesis that they are drawn from the same, non-Gaussian, distribution. You will then be performing a non-parametric test on this hypothesis (barring anything weird or wonderful). Generally, non-parametric tests test differences in medians, so this is what you should report, along with inter-quartile ranges to describe the spread of the data. You should first consider transforming the data (log or root transformations are most common) and if this data is normally distributed perform standard parametric tests.

 

How much of this stuff are you covering on your course?

 

The Apgar problem is quite interesting; there's not a consensus. Some argue ordinal data is qualitative and the mean should never be calculated and some argue that reporting the mean, so long as certain criteria are met, is fine. Unless you know exactly about these criteria, median is the safe bet. It will be interesting to see which school of thought you are taught - let me know.

We're not taught log or root transformations yet, but hey, I might as well look into it and see what it gives. I'll let you know later.

I think I'll go with the median of the apgar scores (interesting: all medians are 9, big surprise). This is what we were taught: that medians can also be used for ordinal data, but of course not for nominal data, given the presence of ranks in ordinal variables

EDIT: I performed log and sqrt transformations on the duration of pregnancy, but the transformed data are also not distributed normally; shall continue with nonparametric test.

I'd share my final report, but it's in Dutch, so ...

Hello everyone

Again for my paper, I was wondering for a specific variable, if it would be more interesting to report mean or median:

The duration of pregnancy is not distributed conform the Gauss normal distribution (significant Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, p < 0.001).

When comparing the durations between 2 sample sizes (they do differ significantly when it comes to pregnancy duration, p = 0.002), is it then more interesting to mention mean (SD) or median duration? So do I say the mean or median durations do significantly differ?

Or doesn't this matter?

Another problem: apgar score measured at 1 minute v. at 5 minutes postnatal: they are both ordinal variables. It is of course not interesting to mention the mean apgar score, but can it be advised to mention the median for both?

Thanks!

F

I remember not understanding how young foreign children could speak a foreign language so well

Tbt, I still find it remarkable of just thinking in another language .. Even writing here in English is a consequence of Belgian-Dutch thinking.

Tell you what - as a small child, I always thought physicians couldn't get sick.

 

There is the imperial gallon (what Brits used to measure petrol and stuff like that in) and there is the US gallon (which the Mercans still use to measure petrol etc.) The imperial gallon is 4.55 litres. The US gallon is 3.79 litres

 

 

The cup is either 236 millilitres or 240 millilitres depending on your exact definition ( US customary or US official).

 

So there are four different "numbers of cups per gallon" - however only an American would use the term and in that case there are 16 cups per gallon

Holy crap I couldn't handle all that complicated mess :')

Thanks for the explanation!

 

There are different gallons? And those on the actual continent of Europe use the fiendishly clever SI where none of that is necessary (in the UK we are stuck in between with grams of sugar, pints of milk, and gallons of beer (and they are different and strangely big gallons)

Ah, well, I was taught the metric system and have never had a clue about what for heaven's sake a gallon was. I thought it was like a steady unit, convertable to litres?

What I meant, was that it differs based on size of the cup (yes, we Europeans are known to have different cup sizes!). But if a gallon is indeed expressed in quantities of a certain volume (e.g. x cups/bottles/tanks/swimming pools), then I will of course retreat my former reaction in a most humble way, not knowing the exact definition of a gallon.

And to cover this, 1 glass ~ 2 cups. 80 seconds later

61 seconds : 4 cups

62: 8 cups

63: 16 cups = 1 gallon

64: 2 gallons

65: 4 gallons

66: 8 gallons

16 Gallons

32 gallons

64 gallons

70 : 128 gallons

256 gallons > 1 cubic meter

2 cubic meters

4 cubic meters

8 cubic meters

75 :16 cubic meters

32 cubic meters

64 cubic meters

128 Cubic meter

256 Cubic meters

80 :512 cubic meters

1024 cubic meters

2048 cubic meters

4096 cubic meters

~~~8000 cubic meters

85: 16000 cubic meters

32000 cubic meters

64000 cubic meters

1.28 e5

2.56 e5

90 :5.12 e5

1,000,000 cubic meters

2 e6

4 e6

8 e6

95 : 1.6 e7

3.2 e7

6.4 e7

128,000,000

256,000,000

100 : 512,000,000

~~~~ 1 cubic kilometer

2,4,8,(105)16,32,64,128,256,(110)512,1024,2048,4096, ~~~ 8000, (115)16000, 32000, 64000, 128000, 256000,(120) 512000, 1 million cubic kilometers

2,4,8,(125)16,32,64,128,256,(130)512,1024,2048,4096, ~~~ 8000, (135)16000, 32000, 64000, 128000, 256000, (140)512000, 1 billion cubic kilometers

~~~~ All the water on earths oceans.

That is, on the assumption that 16 cups equals 1 gallon.

Hello everyone

With this message heralding my 500th message on this forum, and 20 reputation points further, I'd like to thank the mods, and members of this forum for being such a great help. Not only in answering my own questions, but also in helping me helping others and in having very interesting, valuable discussions.

Off to 1,000

Function

I am first of all very glad that you speak of hypothetical situations; bacteria who divide in one second, marvellous ... (For the sake of completing my cynism: 20-30 minutes is a plausible convention on bacterial replication cycle duration)

By logical reasoning, you can easily get what DrKrettin has answered ...

If you were to solve it by equation:

Given the reproduction of each bacteria: 1 generation each second: the number doubles each second.

If you'd like to write down the number of bacteria in function of the time, you could write

[math]N(t) = n_0 \cdot 2^t[/math]

With N(t) the number of bacteria and t the time, in seconds and [math]n_0[/math] the original number of bacteria.

After 1 minute, t = 60

[math]N_{60} = n_0 \cdot 2^{60}[/math]

Now, you want to know at which time N is half of this number, so:

[math]N_t = n_0 \cdot 2^t = \frac{N_{60}}{2} = \frac{n_0 \cdot 2^{60}}{2} = n_0 \cdot 2^{59}[/math]

Ergo, t = 59 seconds.

Reflections? I personally adore the power it expresses near the end ...

Perhaps you should book-end that with [sarcasm] ... [/sarcasm] just to be clear.

I found his "Meanwhile, back on planet Earth..." an equivalent plot twist. +1

Is it normal not exactly understanding anymore what the hell is going on here?

 

 

I clearly remember the case of a suicide, a young guy who had been playing the stock market and generated a capital of 32 million pounds sterling. There was a stock market crash and he lost half within 24 hours.Anybody in that situation who felt life was not living because he only had 16 million pounds left has obviously lost the plot. It makes you wonder what the hell was going on in his mind - I'd be quite chuffed with half that amount, or even a sixteenth. Wait - I'll settle for a thirtytooth.

I wonder if he had a real depression after the terrible news? Or if his act was rather out of impulse? It doesn't seem likely to me that all of a sudden, one can become depressed, to me it seems as if you 'grow' a depression, rather than suddenly fall victim to it, given the neuropsychiatrical basis of a depression ...

scientifically, feeling depressed is not called depression.

Any problems to be solved by money should not be diagnosed as the real depression.

Financial problems may very well lead to a depression ... I'm not sure if a regeneration of financial wealth will thus fix the depression, but it may most certainly contribute to it in such cases. However, once a real depression has struck, more therapy is needed than a financial boost.

 

I'll do it for the sake of your 500 posts.

 

 

I'm trying but failing. You do realise that Function meant a Windows embeded software by "Paint" ?

Geez what did I get myself into

What are we all getting ourselves into

I indeed meant Microsoft Paint

Are we btw guilty of post-hijacking?

 

I was referring to me deviating from the OP into measuring foreheads in a psychology forum. Congrats on your evolution from molecule to...?

 

Let's wait and see ...

How did you manage to get the curvature right?

Answer quickly before the mods come.

I'm sure they won't blame me the lack of mentioning my materials & methods thoroughly enough this time .. Hey, I've got my 500 Messages Jubilee incoming

 

That is extraordinary. May I ask how did you come up with those numbers?

An extraordinarily scientific measurement by means of Paint.

 

@stringJunky

Yes, in First World terms but not Third World terms.

Being poor and remaining poor forever is the reason to get depression.

 

Getting burn-outs as well. No financial factor needed.

 

It's not ambition, it's humour

I feel flattered by your humour, since I have a forehead to head ratio of about 150:350. Try beating that.

OP, care to explain us why you desire our most creative answers and what you're planning to do with them? I hope you're not going to label 1/10 of the persons who responded as sociopathic

Time's a factor we don't possess We're to make every statistical analysis using SPSS (version 23.0 or 24.0), and tbt, I got used to it so I'm not sure if I'd be so eager in switching to another