05-March-2008, 03:50 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 43
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
A couple of questions. Your first graph; is that a Line graph (with the x axis values sorted) or an XY graph?
|
It is a line graph.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
If it is a Line graph, how did you get the Jupiter distance to be even increments of 0.03?
|
“Next I calculated the average number of sunspots per 4 month period—steps of .028281 in distance.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
And if it is a Line graph, and your distance data is not absolutely equal increments, you have to really doubt the values of your linear regression.
|
Please define absolute. The actual step was 0.028280894444445.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
Redo it as a true XY and see what kind of regression you get.
|
The same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
And why did you group the numbers? Why not just graph the 3110 records?
|
It would have been a big blur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
But lets say all of this is true and there are statistical correlations? You have to remember that correlation doesn't prove cause and effect,
|
I already agreed to that point in my previous post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
you have to find a mechanism that explains it.
|
No, “I” don’t.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
I could just as easily say that the number of sunspots changes the distance between the sun and Jupiter.
|
I believe there is a Latin expression that defines this logical argument.
Many things are still not understood about sunspots and what causes them. If sunspot cycles were well understood, 99% of the astrophysicists making predictions about the minimum date of cycle 24 would not have been wrong. If you know of any predictions made before 2004 that that still have the possibility of being correct, please let me know. I have only read of one. So when all of the experts are wrong, then it is time for a different approach.
|