BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] I don't understand
- Subject: [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 10:38:54 -0400
- In-reply-to: <A5AEE35D-4747-4598-95B3-0FD397B99F7A@icloud.com>
- References: <DAC0B6F3-77EA-4DB9-B9CE-344D54C050C6@icloud.com> <7260add9-1d95-d851-9ba0-6a9ba9110b76@riseup.net> <A5AEE35D-4747-4598-95B3-0FD397B99F7A@icloud.com>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Eric Chadbourne <eric.chadbourne at icloud.com > wrote: > > I'm reading up on being "unfalsifiable" now. Fascinating ?Indeed. Science is based on hypothesis-testing. Only a "falsifiable" hypothesis is testable. If evidence against a conspiracy theory is taken to show how effective the conspiracy is,? the hypothesis in unfalsifiable. If the statistical model is guilty of over-fitting (too many degrees of freedom aka too many parameters), the model is non-falsifiable in the short-term. (But eventually enough data will show that adding 5th order epicycles is guff.) -- Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: me at mattgillen.net (Matthew Gillen)
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- References:
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: eric.chadbourne at icloud.com (Eric Chadbourne)
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: ingegnue at riseup.net (IngeGNUe)
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- From: eric.chadbourne at icloud.com (Eric Chadbourne)
- [Discuss] I don't understand
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] I don't understand
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Flummoxed by behavior: openwrt on AC1750
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] I don't understand
- Next by thread: [Discuss] I don't understand
- Index(es):
