Earlier you saw an article on BBC about “statistics of discovery” and you immediately thought of Stoppard’s play so you popped a selection of the article in below:
** **
10 June 2011 Last updated at 10:04 ET
Tests 'reject new particle claim'
By Paul Rincon
Science reporter, BBC News
Cross-checks on data that hinted at the discovery of a new sub-atomic particle have failed to find support for the observation.
In May, researchers working on the CDF experiment at the US Tevatron "atom smasher" announced they had detected tantalising hints of an unanticipated particle.
But independent checks using a separate experiment called DZero have not been able to corroborate the findings - dealing a blow to the idea.
A confirmation would have heralded one of the most radical changes to physics in years. . . .
STATISTICS OF A 'DISCOVERY'
• Particle physics has an accepted definition for a "discovery": a five-sigma level of certainty
• The number of sigmas is a measure of how unlikely it is that an experimental result is simply down to chance rather than a real effect
• Similarly, tossing a coin and getting a number of heads in a row may just be chance, rather than a sign of a "loaded" coin
• The "three sigma" level represents about the same likelihood of tossing more than eight heads in a row
• Five sigma, on the other hand, would correspond to tossing more than 20 in a row
A five-sigma result is highly unlikely to happen by chance, and thus an experimental result becomes an accepted discovery
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13722986
** **
Now it is mid-afternoon and everyone else has gone shopping.
I thought it was a cool coincidence that this science article has some great information for the cause. Happens every once in a while, for which I am thankful (always after the fact, of course).
Meaning you can’t be thankful before a coincidence occurs.
No. The event that is the coincidence can occur before I know it, but it is not a coincidence to me until I know it.
So, a coincidence can only be so if one is conscious it exists?
I would say “yes” but I will have to look up the definition to be sure (I have done this before but who knows when – it is already in the notes one year or another).
Coincidence: 2: the occurrence of events that happen at the same time by accident but seem to have some connection:” (M-W)
So, in scene eight it is a coincidence that Tiresias walks by the slit of a ‘cave’ in the rocks below when the ‘fresh air’ fumes out and catches his notice?
Actually, no, since you were doing the writing from my head it would appear to me ‘deus ex machina’, although it is not contrived to conclude the event it is contrived to carry on the plot. I knew this was a weak way to solve a problem but I did not remember Horace had something to do with it.
The Latin phrase "deus ex machina" comes to English usage from Horace’s Ars Poetica, where he instructs poets that they must never resort to a god from the machine to solve their plots. He refers to the conventions of Greek tragedy, where a crane (mekhane) was used to lower actors playing gods onto the stage. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" . . . , or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. Although this phrase is somewhat diluted in transliteration as earlier in history, the phrase "god from the machine" implies the old use of mechanical manipulation, i.e. to be made with one's hands. So if there were a more generally accurate way of translating deus ex machina into English, it would be "god from our hands" or "god that we make", implying that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man.”
(From Wikipedia: Deus ex Machina)
** **
The last sentence in the above definition is interesting. I did not know this. Whenever I have seen or used this word I thought that as the last resort, as it were, it could refer to a G---D created miracle. Not as a play of course, but that it could happen. Even as an agnostic, having an open mind, I would have to say it is a possibility, how can anyone in their right mind say otherwise without having a terrible arrogance and pride in their rational thought processes?
At least I can see where you stand on the subject, boy. Post. – Amorella.
No comments:
Post a Comment