There's a passage in The Quants where you are explaining the Law of Large numbers and you write
Ten flips of a coin could produce seven heads and three tails, 70 percent heads, 30 percent tails. But 10,000 flips of a coin will always produce a ratio much closer to 50-50.
This is the negation of the Law of Large Numbers. In fact, you italicized the part that it makes it wrong. 10,000 flips of a coin could most certainly wind up being further from the expected outcome than 10 flips.
Maybe this was just an uncaught error, but the question my friends and I all ask is how can we trust someone who appears not to understand one of the most basic results of statistics to explain a complicated financial system to us?
curiousfinguy111 karma
Alright, I'm going to be a jerk and ask this.
There's a passage in The Quants where you are explaining the Law of Large numbers and you write
This is the negation of the Law of Large Numbers. In fact, you italicized the part that it makes it wrong. 10,000 flips of a coin could most certainly wind up being further from the expected outcome than 10 flips.
Maybe this was just an uncaught error, but the question my friends and I all ask is how can we trust someone who appears not to understand one of the most basic results of statistics to explain a complicated financial system to us?
View HistoryShare Link