AdvRoboticsE529

@Bignose You don't estimate, this would eliminate the purpose. I mentioned possibilities of mass-confirmation with the assistance of computing technology and robotics, although likely still premature, it does not exclude this possibility as well as many other methods, further, the fact that statistics is applied in industry does not validate the method, which most of you don't seem to care. By estimation you no longer have 100% certainty, so, if you have the technology to not to do so, you don't. I already gave an example of statistics being akin to throwing an object 'x' amount of times in a controlled lab to result in a needed variable from false average, where mechanics provide a valid picture of the motion of the object to result in the 100% accurate value for the needed variable, different fields obviously requires different respective methods. Most of you keep repeating the same thing. By eliminating the purpose, that is, the purpose of replacing statistics.

Not really much comment on the validity of statistics, for most part of this thread there's mostly defensive comments for statistics yet does not prepare to take the other side to conclude in a less biased conclusion.

Sorry for my bad grammar, makes it difficult to get my point across. Statistics can be useful, however, it doesn't mean or seem to be the best method for most models.

I do not dispute that in industry statistics can be useful, that doesn't mean that after the successful establishment of the true relationship that it cannot be improved upon. You cannot predict accurately what will drive over the bridge a century later, if there is a technological revolution similar to that of the industrial revolution, instead of designing a structure of non-existent technology not of the scale of the technology of future transportation system, this will not be preferable or practical, instead, you should demolish or re-modify. Such that building railways before the existence of magnum trains, you don't apply historical technology but propose a new format. So, the application of such is already flawed. You can ensure the properties of the material over specific unit (a form of "concentration" of quality) by artificial synthesis and with control assisted by computing technology and accuracy driven technology. Consider artificially synthesized diamonds, further, you apply maths to result in 100% certainty, diamonds for example possess a quite perfect structure, not that of statistics. Also, something in which may seem imperfect, we shouldn't be so quickly to think that there is no definite pattern, consider fractal dimensions, instead of applying statistics and encouraging uncertainty, why not look for them?

A problem of a circular disk for example, where the application of force is at the line of symmetry on the 2nd dimensional plane of the disk, the point of force applied and its displacement from the centre of mass is 'd1', force applied is 'x', displacement from ground is 'd2' etc. Trigonometric function for one circular spin of the disk, determine time taken and the displacement. Preferably in a vacuum. If variables are given, why not? If the force is not applied at the line of symmetry in the context of a 2nd dimensional plane it would be more difficult as its spinning motion is less perfect.

There are no such system of water circulation for the prevention of combustion in our bodies, other organisms such as plants that possess xylem possess a superior form of water circulation. Water in the body is not designed for the prevention of combustion, but designed for maximum diffusion and the utilisation of water specifically in the process of hydrolysis. Further, water molecules can be found in larger molecules hence different properties hence un-pure, the molar properties is quite important of course.

"When you can predict with certainty the result of a die roll you might have a case." It's classical mechanics, depending on the variables, not a new branch of maths...

"Probably not: too much water." Water in the human body is not designed to prevent combustion... further, much water in our body is not pure.

Not that I'm saying statistics does not work in certain cases, however, as the improvement computer technology and robotics in manufactures, uncertainty in industry can be eliminated. Obviously, previously when computing and robotic technology is premature, most do not have the time for 100% confirmation, however, I hope that this could change.

So, what would you guys think would be the concrete answer to the validity of statistics? Or perhaps limited thesis is written upon such and have not been considered sufficiently?

Oh yes, testing a specific statistical set of pills in order to determine 100% of the pills. In previous decades, check toxic capsules, example of social phenomenon includes Chicago Tylenol Murders, tempered capsules that is unaccounted for in statistical models. Some methods can destroy the pills, so how about create new methods and technology in the process to result in a mass-confirmation of properties of pills? Instead of living in uncertainty? If it is admitted, then perhaps we can move and improve upon previous methods. I for one, intend to make identification of specific set of diseases quickly by the percentage of active anti-bodies / antigens, not the statistical approach, but the basically a fraction approach, or, you can take the statistical approach to result in the possibility of incorrect identification.

So what would you say? Would you think that it is preferable to determine the validity of statistics... with statistics? : ) Or would you not be satisfied with the absence of the level of proofs found in poor maths, and that the definitions are susceptible to being amended. For example, classical definition of variance, initially requires the summation of the difference of squared values minus the mean, depending on the person you speak with, they have different reasons for why the value is squared, inflates value, results in positive value (excluding application of complex numbers), for some people, subjectively, apparently gives a nicer set of mathematical description etc.

Which statement. If you are referring to the 1st statement, I want to see if people who defend validity of statistics are open to such propositions. If you can prove that statistics provides superior quality control as contrast to the control of quality by determining true relationships, then it would make me question and begin to reform maths, when I reach university this will be a priority. As you may know, 0^0 is undefined, we need complex numbers to amend previous errors, the typical in pure maths which shows how the system could be improved upon, if you can prove that uncertainty prevails over direct relationship more work would need to go back into the basics.

What do you mean in post 4?

Consider this, I can, with the application of mechanics, determine with 100% accuracy of an object's acceleration given several known variables, which initially might seem difficult to search for, yet in the process of creating methods and tools to calculate and determine such unknown variables in order to result in acceleration, can also improve technology, examples include laser technology. Or, I can set up a practical, whereby I try to create most constants, limiting to several variables, in the meanwhile, unknown to myself that there are still existent variables that I have not made into constants. I throw an object for 'x' amount, and from statistics determine the statistical false acceleration of the object. Perhaps it might not be as obvious in this context, however, in grand economics, it seems extensively obvious to me the in the application of statistics with heavy emphasis on correlation in an attempt to establish a relationship, when relationship exist between your correlated variable it is usually an accident, and if the unknown variable with true relationships are altered, you are oblivious to the reason why the correlation no longer applies. Consider the paper: "On Default Correlation. A Copula Function Approach." Agreed upon by most statisticians initially, difficult to apply practically and have failed on occasions. Why would we want to encourage uncertainty?

Would you be open to the idea that if the true variables and relationships are found as searched for after the abandonment of statics, this would make an better and even safer world by providing better quality control tools? Have you ever had the problem that you can't prove statistics in concepts as you can for the power rule of differentiation, for example, of the area of the circle by integration, that's some pretty *concrete* proofs in pure maths. Also, the argument from authority is bad, especially if the authority is ambiguous. Further, statics have encouraged many studies, inflated by media to mislead people who wish for scientific literacy, such as studies which claims "public speaking is the number 1 fear"...

What would you say is the validity of statistics? Also, if you're going to support your argument with definitions please don't, as I think you must ask yourself why you have so much confidence in the definitions in the 1st place I believe the uncertainty just encourages people to not search for the *real* relationship or variables / constants, and it also encourages pointless studies that emphasizes on correlation when the true relationship (if existent at all) is *not* proven. This also goes for probability, however, I heard that probability is quite applicable in quantum physics.