# Welcome to Gaia! ::

Lonely Seeker

The rose in spring
GuardianCentauri
The rose in spring
The only friend you need in life is you. The only person you can trust is you. People always lie. And warping statistics can always be done effectively, even doing so in ways that work with Benford's Law.

I sympathize with some of the experiences and what not that you briefly described above, but can't you see how your belief that people always lie presents your perspective with a major bias in and of itself?

Also, there's a logical paradox here. If I am to take your words for granted, people always lie. That means that you are lying, which means that your statement that people always lie is... a lie.

You didn't answer my questions about whether or not you feel that you can avoid all mistakes and what solution you would come up with to calculate wage gap all by yourself.

The rose in spring
Sexual Innuendo
The rose in spring
People have bias myself included, but numbers do not. Numbers only lie when a human favricates them. Numbers are consistant. 2+2 always equals four, numbers have no emotion, they do not change without reason and they do not abandon you. Humans however are illogical and inconsistent (Not to mention backstabbers). For example, if I have 20 florescent lightbulbs in my office and they run for 8 hours for 7 days while each bulb is 40 watts, then my office will be running 198 killowatts in May. That number doesn't change. If it costs me .15 cents per killowatt an hour, then those lights will be costing me \$29.70 that month. That doesn't change unless a bulb goes out or the company changes the price. Such money adds up to \$311.6 per year assuming there is work 365 days a year. That is the evidence I am talking about. If you have doubts, then I can give you the numbers.
Obviously we're talking about statistics here. And you think all statistics are fake or untrustworthy, except the ones you create?

Because I myself made it and I trust myself. Anyway, let me elaborate since you need the numbers.

There are 31 days in may, I have 20 florescent bulbs in the office, they run 8 hours a day at 40 watts per hour

So we have 20*40 = 800 watts an hour
800*8 = 6,400 watts a day. So 6.4 kilowatts
6.4*31 = 198.4 kilowatts in May. Rounded for simplicity, 198
198*.15 (Cost kwh) = \$29.70 for that month.

Then we do the annual math. Not every month has 31 days, Februrary, April, June, September, November do not. There are 3 days missing in Feb
29.70*12 = 356.4

3+1+1+1+1=7 for days missing

7*6.4= 44.8 kwh fewer

356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

Someone else double check my math please (because as I said, it's important for people to check each others' work), but I think you've already made a mistake here. Your 356.4 number is an amount in dollars, so it's \$356.40. However, you're subtracting a number that is in kW, 44.8, so that can't accurately give you the final dollar amount for the year.

20 bulbs * 0.04 kW per bulb * 8 hours per day * 365 days per year * \$0.15 per kWh = \$350.40

Also, it depends on what the exact objective of your question is (which is where the logic comes in on problem solving rather than all of it being purely math). If you were calculating how much it will cost you this year, 2012, you need to take into account that it is a leap year. That means you're actually multiplying by 366 days, thus the result will be \$351.36.

If you meant to calculate the average amount per year, then you need the approximate average of days per year after leap years are taken into consideration. You can calculate this by the following equation:

365 + 1/4 − 1/100 + 1/400 = 365.2425 (Link)

That should bring the average yearly cost to approximately \$350.63 (rounded down on the last cent).

Additionally, my electricity bills include other fees and charges like transmission line usage, administration fees, etc. as well as taxes applied to the subtotal, so those would have to be accounted for if your bill includes such things as well.

I recognize that I may be overthinking your question since it's meant to be more theoretical, but I'm highlighting possible things you might forget to include in a real life example, thus you could still make a mistake even though raw math itself does "not change without reason" (yes, I know what you mean by that).

The reason you got 350.63 is because the 44.8 was not calculated into money. I'm only giving a very elementary aspect of accounting. Once you get that, you also have to add the computers, the AC, the security systems, the phones and so on before you go to other expenses like wages. Accounting is a science in of itself.

I brought it up because you subtracted the 44.8 from the amount in dollars to get the final amount in dollars. That doesn't work because you've mixed up what the numbers represent.

The rose in spring
356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

That means:

\$ - kW = \$

You can't do that. That reminds me of mistakes I used to make in physics where I forgot to keep on top of what each number's units of measurement were (ie, metres for distance, m/second for velocity, m/s^2 for acceleration, etc.).
The rose in spring
That is why you must always abolish doubt in yourself.

Then you're just being foolish.

Look, you're not some kind of self-sufficient entity that spawned out of nowhere. You learned things. From other people. If what you're saying is true, then how do you know that math isn't a lie? That language isn't a lie? That your sense of self, concepts, identity, and et cetera aren't a lie? These don't come from just yourself, but from your exposure and interactions with others. If you doubt others, then you will naturally doubt yourself because you are a product of your interaction with others.
GuardianCentauri
The rose in spring
GuardianCentauri
The rose in spring
The only friend you need in life is you. The only person you can trust is you. People always lie. And warping statistics can always be done effectively, even doing so in ways that work with Benford's Law.

I sympathize with some of the experiences and what not that you briefly described above, but can't you see how your belief that people always lie presents your perspective with a major bias in and of itself?

Also, there's a logical paradox here. If I am to take your words for granted, people always lie. That means that you are lying, which means that your statement that people always lie is... a lie.

You didn't answer my questions about whether or not you feel that you can avoid all mistakes and what solution you would come up with to calculate wage gap all by yourself.

The rose in spring
Sexual Innuendo
Obviously we're talking about statistics here. And you think all statistics are fake or untrustworthy, except the ones you create?

Because I myself made it and I trust myself. Anyway, let me elaborate since you need the numbers.

There are 31 days in may, I have 20 florescent bulbs in the office, they run 8 hours a day at 40 watts per hour

So we have 20*40 = 800 watts an hour
800*8 = 6,400 watts a day. So 6.4 kilowatts
6.4*31 = 198.4 kilowatts in May. Rounded for simplicity, 198
198*.15 (Cost kwh) = \$29.70 for that month.

Then we do the annual math. Not every month has 31 days, Februrary, April, June, September, November do not. There are 3 days missing in Feb
29.70*12 = 356.4

3+1+1+1+1=7 for days missing

7*6.4= 44.8 kwh fewer

356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

Someone else double check my math please (because as I said, it's important for people to check each others' work), but I think you've already made a mistake here. Your 356.4 number is an amount in dollars, so it's \$356.40. However, you're subtracting a number that is in kW, 44.8, so that can't accurately give you the final dollar amount for the year.

20 bulbs * 0.04 kW per bulb * 8 hours per day * 365 days per year * \$0.15 per kWh = \$350.40

Also, it depends on what the exact objective of your question is (which is where the logic comes in on problem solving rather than all of it being purely math). If you were calculating how much it will cost you this year, 2012, you need to take into account that it is a leap year. That means you're actually multiplying by 366 days, thus the result will be \$351.36.

If you meant to calculate the average amount per year, then you need the approximate average of days per year after leap years are taken into consideration. You can calculate this by the following equation:

365 + 1/4 − 1/100 + 1/400 = 365.2425 (Link)

That should bring the average yearly cost to approximately \$350.63 (rounded down on the last cent).

Additionally, my electricity bills include other fees and charges like transmission line usage, administration fees, etc. as well as taxes applied to the subtotal, so those would have to be accounted for if your bill includes such things as well.

I recognize that I may be overthinking your question since it's meant to be more theoretical, but I'm highlighting possible things you might forget to include in a real life example, thus you could still make a mistake even though raw math itself does "not change without reason" (yes, I know what you mean by that).

The reason you got 350.63 is because the 44.8 was not calculated into money. I'm only giving a very elementary aspect of accounting. Once you get that, you also have to add the computers, the AC, the security systems, the phones and so on before you go to other expenses like wages. Accounting is a science in of itself.

I brought it up because you subtracted the 44.8 from the amount in dollars to get the final amount in dollars. That doesn't work because you've mixed up what the numbers represent.

The rose in spring
356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

That means:

\$ - kW = \$

You can't do that. That reminds me of mistakes I used to make in physics where I forgot to keep on top of what each number's units of measurement were (ie, metres for distance, m/second for velocity, m/s^2 for acceleration, etc.).

Hence doing the numbers for a second time or more. The only reason I did not was because I don't need to obsess over the numbers like I have to at my job.
Kiumaru
The rose in spring
That is why you must always abolish doubt in yourself.

Then you're just being foolish.

Look, you're not some kind of self-sufficient entity that spawned out of nowhere. You learned things. From other people. If what you're saying is true, then how do you know that math isn't a lie? That language isn't a lie? That your sense of self, concepts, identity, and et cetera aren't a lie? These don't come from just yourself, but from your exposure and interactions with others. If you doubt others, then you will naturally doubt yourself because you are a product of your interaction with others.

I know math isn't a lie because it's repeatable. Humans are s**t, numbers are not. They never are. I am a product of myself. Not from some blight on the earth that only comes second to a meteor in terms of destructiveness.
The rose in spring
Because I myself made it and I trust myself. Anyway, let me elaborate since you need the numbers.

There are 31 days in may, I have 20 florescent bulbs in the office, they run 8 hours a day at 40 watts per hour

So we have 20*40 = 800 watts an hour
800*8 = 6,400 watts a day. So 6.4 kilowatts
6.4*31 = 198.4 kilowatts in May. Rounded for simplicity, 198
198*.15 (Cost kwh) = \$29.70 for that month.

Then we do the annual math. Not every month has 31 days, Februrary, April, June, September, November do not. There are 3 days missing in Feb
29.70*12 = 356.4

3+1+1+1+1=7 for days missing

7*6.4= 44.8 kwh fewer

356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

You forgot to convert the 44.8 kwh into dollars. You're subtracting kilowatts from dollars right now with "356.4 - 44.8".

44.8kwh*\$.15/kwh=\$6.72

\$356.4 - \$6.72 = \$349.68

Although, we didn't really need to go through all of the trouble to convert months. An Earth year has approximately 365.24 days.

365.24*6.4 kw/day = 2337.536 kw/year
2337.536 kw/year * .15 dollars/kw = \$350.63/year

This is closer to the \$349.68 estimate than the \$311.60 estimate you gave so the math seems to check out that you've made a mistake. If you were to have total faith in yourself, then it seems that it would have led you down the wrong path.

Lonely Seeker

The rose in spring
Hence doing the numbers for a second time or more. The only reason I did not was because I don't need to obsess over the numbers like I have to at my job.

I understand that a casual debate online isn't as important as the impact of accurate numbers in a job, yes, but don't you think verification is still a good idea when you're putting forth such an example of math to try to prove a point?

If you make a mistake, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the notion that you can't miss your own errors, you know? It's especially critical after making an assertion that everyone else's numbers in statistics and such are flawed and that yours are correct and can be trusted.

The rose in spring
I know math isn't a lie because it's repeatable. Humans are s**t, numbers are not. They never are. I am a product of myself. Not from some blight on the earth that only comes second to a meteor in terms of destructiveness.

From a purely mathematical perspective, I agree with you and understand what you mean. The problem lies in the fact that we are all human beings interpreting those numbers, and sometimes we make mistakes. As you said yourself, humans can be illogical. That's why I'm saying the more times something can be repeated with more people and in more studies, the less chance of error there is than with a single person. 3nodding
The rose in spring
Kiumaru
The rose in spring
That is why you must always abolish doubt in yourself.

Then you're just being foolish.

Look, you're not some kind of self-sufficient entity that spawned out of nowhere. You learned things. From other people. If what you're saying is true, then how do you know that math isn't a lie? That language isn't a lie? That your sense of self, concepts, identity, and et cetera aren't a lie? These don't come from just yourself, but from your exposure and interactions with others. If you doubt others, then you will naturally doubt yourself because you are a product of your interaction with others.

I know math isn't a lie because it's repeatable. Humans are s**t, numbers are not. They never are. I am a product of myself. Not from some blight on the earth that only comes second to a meteor in terms of destructiveness.

You are no product of yourself. You didn't teach yourself language. You didn't teach yourself concepts. You didn't teach yourself math. You didn't teach yourself any "knowledge" that you have. You were not, as some baby, abandoned into the wild where you were able to somehow survive without any help at all and attain a working knowledge of the world.

You did not make yourself. At least, you didn't even make most of yourself. Your concepts have been an amalgamation of what people have said to you/what you've heard/read and what you thought in response to those things.

If you really think you were self-made, then I'm afraid that you're telling yourself an enormous lie.
Kiumaru
The rose in spring
Because I myself made it and I trust myself. Anyway, let me elaborate since you need the numbers.

There are 31 days in may, I have 20 florescent bulbs in the office, they run 8 hours a day at 40 watts per hour

So we have 20*40 = 800 watts an hour
800*8 = 6,400 watts a day. So 6.4 kilowatts
6.4*31 = 198.4 kilowatts in May. Rounded for simplicity, 198
198*.15 (Cost kwh) = \$29.70 for that month.

Then we do the annual math. Not every month has 31 days, Februrary, April, June, September, November do not. There are 3 days missing in Feb
29.70*12 = 356.4

3+1+1+1+1=7 for days missing

7*6.4= 44.8 kwh fewer

356.4 - 44.8 = 311.6

You forgot to convert the 44.8 kwh into dollars. You're subtracting kilowatts from dollars right now with "356.4 - 44.8".

44.8kwh*\$.15/kwh=\$6.72

\$356.4 - \$6.72 = \$349.68

Although, we didn't really need to go through all of the trouble to convert months. An Earth year has approximately 365.24 days.

365.24*6.4 kw/day = 2337.536 kw/year
2337.536 kw/year * .15 dollars/kw = \$350.63/year

This is closer to the \$349.68 estimate than the \$311.60 estimate you gave so the math seems to check out that you've made a mistake. If you were to have total faith in yourself, then it seems that it would have led you down the wrong path.

The rose in spring

Thing is, weren't you trying to make a point with that? That you could trust yourself with math? Because you sort of failed at making that point, then.
GuardianCentauri
The rose in spring
Hence doing the numbers for a second time or more. The only reason I did not was because I don't need to obsess over the numbers like I have to at my job.

I understand that a casual debate online isn't as important as the impact of accurate numbers in a job, yes, but don't you think verification is still a good idea when you're putting forth such an example of math to try to prove a point?

If you make a mistake, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the notion that you can't miss your own errors, you know? It's especially critical after making an assertion that everyone else's numbers in statistics and such are flawed and that yours are correct and can be trusted.

The rose in spring
I know math isn't a lie because it's repeatable. Humans are s**t, numbers are not. They never are. I am a product of myself. Not from some blight on the earth that only comes second to a meteor in terms of destructiveness.

From a purely mathematical perspective, I agree with you and understand what you mean. The problem lies in the fact that we are all human beings interpreting those numbers, and sometimes we make mistakes. As you said yourself, humans can be illogical. That's why I'm saying the more times something can be repeated with more people and in more studies, the less chance of error there is than with a single person. 3nodding

More people? No. I am the only person I trust.

Lonely Seeker

The rose in spring

He was just double checking the numbers because I asked other people to do so. I needed to make sure that I wasn't making a mistake myself, after all.

Thanks Kiumaru! ^^
GuardianCentauri
The rose in spring

He was just double checking the numbers because I asked other people to do so. I needed to make sure that I wasn't making a mistake myself, after all.

Thanks Kiumaru! ^^

It's been a long, long time since I've done any sort of math. I wouldn't be surprised myself if I made a mistake somewhere in there.

Lesson being: We shouldn't put blind faith into ourselves. ninja
Kiumaru
The rose in spring
Kiumaru
The rose in spring
That is why you must always abolish doubt in yourself.

Then you're just being foolish.

Look, you're not some kind of self-sufficient entity that spawned out of nowhere. You learned things. From other people. If what you're saying is true, then how do you know that math isn't a lie? That language isn't a lie? That your sense of self, concepts, identity, and et cetera aren't a lie? These don't come from just yourself, but from your exposure and interactions with others. If you doubt others, then you will naturally doubt yourself because you are a product of your interaction with others.

I know math isn't a lie because it's repeatable. Humans are s**t, numbers are not. They never are. I am a product of myself. Not from some blight on the earth that only comes second to a meteor in terms of destructiveness.

You are no product of yourself. You didn't teach yourself language. You didn't teach yourself concepts. You didn't teach yourself math. You didn't teach yourself any "knowledge" that you have. You were not, as some baby, abandoned into the wild where you were able to somehow survive without any help at all and attain a working knowledge of the world.

You did not make yourself. At least, you didn't even make most of yourself. Your concepts have been an amalgamation of what people have said to you/what you've heard/read and what you thought in response to those things.

If you really think you were self-made, then I'm afraid that you're telling yourself an enormous lie.

I turned myself into who I am. My parents were bad with money, I became good with money. My friends were leeches, I leeched off of them. A rapist attacked me, I turn him into a pile of meat. I did that, not them. They had nothing to do with it. I simply learned from their mistakes by myself.
Kiumaru
The rose in spring

Thing is, weren't you trying to make a point with that? That you could trust yourself with math? Because you sort of failed at making that point, then.

I trust myself in EVERY ASPECT and I trust nobody else.
The rose in spring
I turned myself into who I am. My parents were bad with money, I became good with money. My friends were leeches, I leeched off of them. A rapist attacked me, I turn him into a pile of meat. I did that, not them. They had nothing to do with it. I simply learned from their mistakes by myself.

Even then, you're presupposing a lot of things that you have already learned. And learning from others' mistakes is a sort of interaction in itself.

Nonetheless, why trust math even if it's repeatable? How are you sure that you weren't simply taught an internally consistent lie?