davidivad

itook care to not say that statistics was subjective, aklthough i see where you may have misread. statistics is clearly a form of math used in almost every field i can think of at least to some degree. every time you deal with a number from a real world thing you are looking at a statistic. your last was a swing and a miss also. any time someone has to tell me what i am saying, i immediately start looking at the ground for trails of straw. i implied nor said outright anything resmbling statistics being invalid. are you sure that you were reading my posts?

to answer this problem you must open the box by asking a question. you must take a measurement thus changing the result.

you caught my stone too. sorry, crosspost

in life, the question is the answer...

@swansont you make a formidable scientist.

a hammer for a nail and a wrench for a bolt. it requires both to be the most effective design for anything.

i totally agree. the idea is to be objective as you can, however there comes a time where you are allowed to think about something beyond this point. after all, it is the tool and we are the masters deciding what to do with it. in the end we come home from work and cater to a subjective world. the two may not meet eye to eye but they must meet nontheless. if not then what was it all for.

not to be a pain, but i would pay someone to do a scale model test.

absolutely.

there is no doubt that science must be pure. this literal invokation upon science is what establishes it's power as a tool. art is an emotional expression that conveys higher thought process whereas science breaks things down to simplest components. while i feel that science is one of our most valuable assets as a species, we live in a world that contains more than absolutes and numbers. psycology is a small step into that realm with the same rules as science. you can write all day about a specific disease all day even explaining the symptoms and still not convey the depths as to the condition of the patient. i assert that we need clean science where it does work, but not be skeptics of art where it is needed.

nothing explains the human condition better than art. that is because art is an expression in and of itself. pun intended.

yes, but only six bag.

ah! psychology- the science of sujectivity. good answer.

that would be two and a half kilotonnes. of six bag.

@studiot i must concede that with large pours of concrete of the same type they take routine measures to document and verify that the concrete is poured correctly. statistics for quality control...

you place an order for concrete. you ask for six bag. you get six bag. not all concrete is the same stuff either.

this may be a stray of topic, but imagine that titan has a small enough mass that biological emissions may be a means of propulsion. what is life on titan doing? it is just farting around...

this may not be a good comparison as concrete is mixed specificly to the application. however, you make a good argument for it's usefulness.

statistics itself is not valid. it is a matter of successful results.

biased results?

statistics must be interpreted. like art, it requires pattern recognition which is subjective. this is why it is the job of the scientist to be as objective as possible. in a paper that has statistics, and is well written, the author does not quantify the data for you. he or she merely shows you the data. it is up to the professionals of the field to decide if it is useful. since right and wrong are subjective ideas in themselves, we pick the interpretations of those best able to pick the least of evils. truth be told the concept is effective enough to have measurable results.

i would need to know the physical dimensions as well as mechanical stresses of daily use. trying to adhere something without adhering it is a task. i suggest that some form of thermomoulding technique should be employed in the assembly process. you would need surface area for this to be a durable piece.

with this writing format there seems to be the issue of "the big sentence." my guess is that our paper has the requirement of fitting the paper into one sentence- my guess is that this is practice. i think that the main goal here is structure over anything else. i did not get the impression that this was a thesis. it was a good job.... just for argument's sake and to keep the thread alive.

well, not that you needed it but i wanted to see a cover page and working table of contents. on a positive side you covered both sides of the argument. one thing i do not like to see is a sentence that starts with "this." remember there is always another way to write the sentence. you had plenty of references so that is cool. the oldest reference was from 2000 so that's good. i see a few little things here and there. you made a word. you quoted without parenthesis. in all, it was a great paper to read as it informed me well. thank god i am not a teacher

i would be more concerned about the drag induced by the sides and rear of the train.