2

Looking at how US keeps making up the fake reasons to invade all over the world all the time, it looks like it is on the finish line to build up its empire. How can one prove that some country is becoming and empire? They say that nurse Nariah was a mistake, Kosovo genocide was fake, second invasion into Iraq was make under mistake reason, invasion into Livia was a mistake and so on. I am not asking how is it possible that superintelligent democratic regime, based of "free press" makes one war crime "mistake" after another nonstop. I want to know how to distinguish the stupidity (the western economic pressure and military interventions are explained by stupidity) from the intentional imperialism? Is it possible to prove that all these are not "mistakes" but intentional terror and bending into submission? Will it be easier to say that these all NATO interventions were not a mistake but intentional (crimes) once Russia and China (I am not talking about lesser countries like Iran, Cuba, N.Korea  they will not stand long) are squashed?
Edit: @rougon says that mistakes are not convincing because they are sudden and not intentional. He says that Empires do not make mistakes but dictate their will instead. Ok, I agree. But what is more expansive and authoritative than terrorist statement 'either you bend to our rule (join our 'leadership') or we squash you!'? How imposing your leadership by force is different from imperialism, how being exceptional, nontriable is different from being an empire? It seems that with statement The United States Must Be the World’s Policeman Only America has the material and moral greatness to stop the slide into chaos and foster peace Rasmussen pisses right into your eyes. The criminal, who was elevated to the head of NATO for making the "Iraq mistake" in 2003, openly confesses that he is fighting for the US Empire. But, you always find excuses to not agree, to avert your eyes from the Empire step. That is why I ask you: is there anything that convinces you besides the open declaration of US Empire over the mainstream media?  
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Drunk Cynic, Sam I am♦ 17 mins ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit your question.

A road to injustice
Monday, October 10, 2016
How can one prove that US has an imperialistic plan? [on hold]
How is that possible that terrorists threaten EU states but not Middle East? [on hold]
I see that Western world (how do you call that superstate, controlled from the US?) is very sensitive to Islamic terrorists. Meanwhile, the West is reckless to support "moderate" jihadist "freedom fighters" in the moderately democratic states like Libya, Egypt and Syria, and also Afghanistan during the Soviet time, in the Middle East where you can easily find and recruit people crazy about Islam.
It cannot be that western superstate has a hidden agenda. So, why such blindness and outrageous double standards? Is it because they love SaudiQuatar that much? Why don't we have the Arab Spring supported in those tyrannies?
If the western narrative is right, if Arabs did upraise against the tyrannies then why did it happen in Libya, Egypt and Syria, where you have democratically elected government but not in the absolute, westsupported Islamic tyrannies?
Edit: I have got immediate answer that people do not think about it because they are stupid. But who exactly? The most advanced intelligence service in the history is stupid? Or we are stupid if believe this excuse over and over again?  
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by user4012, indigochild, sabbahillel, Sam I am♦ 8 mins ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit your question.

Friday, September 30, 2016
The justice prevailed for the first time ever
I cannot believe my eyes. Here is a statistical post on a chat.stat.stackexchange. The boss has marked as spam/offensive. Statistical question in a statistical chat is defenitely a spam/offensive when your boss does not want to see it right? You is a free person, you have a boss and you msut obey him. Same in the internet. Every volunteer community has a boss who contributes during his free time and we must obey him, fulfilling all his whims, no matter how criminal. Same is here. The boss was very surpirsed when others refused to fulfill his nasty letter. They have decided to fact check the dirty insinuation of the boss as truth, not take it for granted. It turned out that posting statistic question in statistic room is not a spam nor offense. It was certainly offense when the room boss dislikes it but flag has invoked the bosses from other rooms which did not share the dickness of the stats room owners. You see how the dick started to twist. He stated that posting ontopic questions is spam/offense because it is not appropriate. Obviously, it is not. Even child can understand that the advise that it is better to post these questions on Main site instead of chat does not mean that posting question in chat is invalid. The guy with 17k reputation could not understand that himself. He behaves like mad dictator and others have to explain him that math/stat is not offense only if it is offense and what is he doing in the math/stat room if it is offense? Hardly the dick could expect such rebutt. He certainly behaves like a boss whose absurdish word is a law. Then, dick continued twisting saying that he referred some another response. He twisted when others asked him to point what he means by "it". They started to explain him that he needs to point exactly which post he refers to. The nazi dick replayed with the pointer to this advise! He just trolls the every piece of sense people try to deliver to him. He behaves like baby. They guy with 17k reputation behaves like baby!
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
tinterval for the difference of two means
Is pooled sample variance equal to the combined sample variance? We use the following formula
$$S^2_p = {(n_11)S_X^2 + (m1)S_Y^2 \over n + m  2}$$
and check if pooled variance, computed for two or more samples, matches the the variance of all samples combined into one large sample. We compute the statistics of every interval separately, when all samples compbined into one large sample. If we have two samples, we compute also statistics for the difference of two samples and confidence intervals of their differences as if two samples (aka groups) are unpaird.
Use new lines to separate samples and commas or whitespaces to separate the sample elements.
$$S^2_p = {(n_11)S_X^2 + (m1)S_Y^2 \over n + m  2}$$
and check if pooled variance, computed for two or more samples, matches the the variance of all samples combined into one large sample. We compute the statistics of every interval separately, when all samples compbined into one large sample. If we have two samples, we compute also statistics for the difference of two samples and confidence intervals of their differences as if two samples (aka groups) are unpaird.
Use new lines to separate samples and commas or whitespaces to separate the sample elements.
 I have noticed that samples may be very grouped so that there is little variance within them so that pooled will be close to zero. It seems that the variance of the combined sample should be always larger for the same reason.
 The opposite seems possible, however, yet. You see, the aggregate sample variance is lower than pooled. I explain this by lower denominator of the pooled variance: whereas we divide by Bessel's 1 in the normal sample variance, we divide by NumOfGroups in the pooled.
 This example must give $$(10.26−9.02)±2.101(2.226)\sqrt{1/10+1/10}$$ where 10.26−9.02 is the difference of sample means, $$2.101 = t_{0.025,18}$$ is the normalized 95% tinterval for 20 samples and 2.226 is the pooled standard deviation.
 This example computes a paired difference interval $$0.1987±2.1448(0.2383/\sqrt{15}) = (0.0668,0.3306)$$ according to the formula $$\overline{d}±t_{0.025,14}(s_d/\sqrt(n))$$ The difference is significant if it excludes 0.
 Futures without Await are slower
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Student's t confidence interval
This calculator computes sample mean for the tscore calculator.
If you think that your data is distributed normally (stat 414 uses nomral probability plot to check that), you can enter your series into the left window (spaces, including newlines, and comma separated values are supported). This will compute the mean and variance and redirect you to the tscore calculator 
Rotating the distribution
There are two ways to represent a distribution. Normally, you do it like on the left diagram, with vertical bars (a histogram, pd.f.) which stands on the (Xaxis) value and whose height is proportional to the likelihood/probability. It is lends nicely itself for integrating the probabilities to get into a range of values. It is however not suitable for finding the average. To find the average, you need to rotate the plot 90 degrees so that bar height is proportional to the value and bar width is the probability to get into it, like it is on the right.
Specify the distribution in [value, likelihood] format below:
Specify the distribution in [value, likelihood] format below:
I started to think however that if we make the height of the bar proportionally to the density on the interval, that is count of occurrence per interval length, then histogram becomes suitable for average computation. Making the bars wider, you will average the interval count over length. One large interval which spans the whole histogram width gives the average density, the number of counts per full range of values. What is the difference with the right diagram them? We compute the average density, how many counts are added with every value, whereas right diagram still computes the average value.
I am recalling that the probability (heights) turned horizontally, as on the right figure, represent a convenient way to turn uniform distribution [0, 1] into arbitrary one. Note that the width of the right diagram is 1 and a Math.random, available in any computer, thrown into it, falls into one of the intervals. The corresponding height of the bar, the value, is reported as rnd generator output.
p.d.f.
f(x): with range range:
bins:
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Why invention is different from discovery? [duplicate]
This question already has an answer here:
You say that discovery discovers something preexisting (in the world) whereas inventor comes up with a new idea. But, don't you discover the ideas?
As I understand, there is an abstract world of ideas, where all abstract notions, i.e. ideas, live in. You just discover one or another. They usually tell you how to get from A to B in an optimal way. One way is bad, another is good. And what you do when solve a problem, you find those ways. Mathematicians know very well that solutions are not arbitrary. They exist before you discover them (nobody needs arbitrary solutions as nobody needs garbage). Is desired solution a discovery or an invention? Why do people, particularly academists, insist that there is a distinction between invention and discovery, once you realize that inventors just discover the ideas from the ideal world of ideas/solutions?
 
marked as duplicate by Camil Staps♦, Dave, John Am, commando♦, Eliran H Aug 4 at 14:16
This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question. If this question is different, please edit itto explain how it is different or ask a new question.
deleted by Community♦ Sep 10 at 0:51 (RemoveDeadQuestions)
This question was automatically deleted. Please see the help center for more information.
 

Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)