Re: Institutionalized Denial of the Disproof of Bell's Theor
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:11 pm
FrediFizzx wrote:Heinera wrote:minkwe wrote:In your Statistical Science Paper, you make an equivalent additional assumption that four 2xN independent samples can be randomly drawn from a single 4xN spreadsheet without replacement. But this assumption is wrong for a similar reason. Sampling without replacement does not yield independent subsets. This can be easily seen by asking 4 people to take turns randomly picking two numbers from a set of 8 numbers without replacement. The last person to pick will wonder what you are smoking because they have no choice.
This simply shows that you have no understanding of statistics whatsoever. You also seem to be incapable of understanding the concept of a limit as N goes to infinity. When N is large, in the thousands or tens of thousands, replacement or no replacement makes no practical difference. The last person to pick will not wonder what somebody is smoking. He will wonder why he's bothering at all because he knows that his pick, even if he has no choice, will only have a iota influence on his average.
He's not going to see your post so not sure why you want to post this nonsense. And now he will see it in the quote and probably ignore it anyways.
.
Well, I'm not posting specifically for minkwe to read. There are other dimwits on this forum too, you know.