Extreme Observations
Michael Godin Arlotto (154aamga@pic.ucla.edu)
Wed, 06 Dec 95 16:22:46 -0800
This is in regards to Mallory Ham's recent posting. Whether or not .003 is
enough evidence to disprove the woman's claim that her pregnancy lasted over
ten months depends on your significance level. In other words, the
significance of this number is relative. In many cases the significance level
is set at 1%, and anything lower than this (like in this case) is rejected (eg,
it doesn't realistically fit in this distribution). So I would say that the
probability of this having just in some normal case is just too small to be
considered a part of the regular distribution. The women is either trying to
cover something up or is just mistaken. I know, however, if I left my wife or
girlfriend for ten months (and she wasn't pregnant when I left), I would have
my doubts regarding her fidelity to me when I returned to find her with a baby.
Talk to you later,
Mike
Back to the Chatroom Homepage...
Back to the Stats 154A Homepage...
Back to the listings...
Send a message...
This archive was generated by hypermail 1.02.