Tornadotulokista osa 5

viittaus edelliseen kirjoitti:

RESEARCH APPROACH Goal of the Tornado study The Goal of the tornado study was to seek either supportive or non-supportive evidence for a validation of The Theory of a Sequences. The technical and traditional statistical zero level hypothesis assumes there is no dependency between phenomenon and the studied dilemma, in this case the asynchronic framework, the theory of a sequences. The zero hypothesis broke clearly. The results of a Tornado study refers it is more likely for a Theory of a Sequences to be right than being wrong by the selected macro level framework according tornadoes. Similarly in the situation lacking any counter-arguments and with other preliminary studies it is more logical and more likely for a Theory of a Sequences to be right than being wrong by the selected macro level framework according every phenomenon in life. What does the results means to common man? The tornado study gave positive results suggesting the existence of measurable and meaningful asynchronic time cycles. The time cycles can be used for a practical purposes. Their evidence while leaning to history of time series means the alarms systems are already tested assuming the time series does not suddenly change which would be less likely occasion. VALIDITY OF THE STUDY Q: Do we need now tens of more studies? A: No. It would be simply stupid. While this study is a pilot study and one study, it does not change anything in logic. The behaviour of the tornadoes in their population is already proven by this study. Studying more would mean the same like a headquarter would have received of full envelope of aerial photographs and they would order ten pilot to make the same work again. Q: Are You sure? A: Sure I am sure. When one study is statistically correct it is true and cannot be invalidated by further studies. It is same the studies would be zillions the one study with its empiric does not swing. This I mean also it is uneconomical cliché to claim for further. The only reason to say so in public is because of the rivalry between researchers. Actually to anyone validate this You can watch few sci-fi movies spending few hours with movies makes you more concentrated thinker than one who spends years in universities, while after a while You have two many perspectives to think clear. The best logical principles comes from movies and from history of logic. If some logical principle is mentioned after a 700 years or so. I think the validity is pretty high. * The Occams Razor from 13th century gives a basic principle to compare two alternatives. It says the option out of two which presents more simple logic is the one which is more likely to be true. Hardly You can introduce more practical and useful guidelines for a real world. When we open up new doors we have always, or we can diminish and crystallize the options to two. That should be the way how resources will be allocated and lives to be lived. simply meaning the door is open now, and who goes there is light-years ahead of others who scratch their balls and head and go to university lectures to learn too many options. You can decide if these results and the experiences with other pre-studies are revolutionary or if not. To these who are excited I like to say it is more likely and I know myself already the further studies will do similarly. You will det support for this theory. ------ DUE LIMITATIONS OF A SAMPLE SIZE ** The limitations of a sample size in this study, made the objective construct the basis for general tornado theory and not only to guild an alarm system but prove the theory itself which is larger issue. To get detailed with tornadoes themselves more sample size and more background variables to divide the database is needed to create a comprehensive picture of tornado behaviour according the variables which exists and are collected but their present encoding variated by State. What could scrumble this thought? Such a things would be e.g. that some asshole claim I can not be given a prize because I curse too much or I am too naive represent myself in medias. Reliability of the study material was fed in reliable way, meaning the numerical values are correct. Test methods are checked.They are sufficient. Later in these pages even it would take years the observations of the database is listed so that anyone can and has right to check the information by him or herself.

kirjoitti:

Anonyymi

Kirjoita kommentti

5000

Lähetä