Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX
...I disagree with your calculations based on invalid lineups and prejudicial witness selections
You can disagree all you want, but the calculation is correct. Should you continue to disagree, I'll provide a detailed explanation of why it is correct, and I'll get some other people here to back me up.
|
I just noticed that although the calculation is correct, I wrote the formula incorrectly. The probablility of six false positive identifications is 0.8^6, or about 26%. I inadvertently wrote 1 - 0.8^6, which would be the chance that at least one person would correctly claim that Oswald was not the shooter, if he were not. My apologies if that is what confused you.
__________________
--Doug
"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me
Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor
|