Re:The Fields Medal should return to its roots
by Lio on Monday February 12, 2018 @03:18AM
(#16357278)
Life span here is interesting.
If it’s affected by things like work place deaths because men are more likely to take on dangerous jobs, e.g. sea fisherman, military service, etc. would that overlap with the section of the population likely to be working on pure mathematics?
Suicide, another cause of that difference in average life span, would overlap though I guess.
It would be worth properly investigating as I suspect there’s a lot of complexity hidden here.
Re:The Fields Medal should return to its roots
by Chris2048 on Monday February 12, 2018 @07:19AM
(#16358150)
> Based on a wide range of ability testing we see fat tails
What kind of ability? Mathematical? IQ?
Re:The Fields Medal should return to its roots
by Retric on Monday February 12, 2018 @08:16AM
(#16358354)
IQ, memory etc, in uncalibrated tests you see something close to a bell curve in raw scores but more people score very high 180+ than you would get from an actual bell curve. So, many tests are given a max score or compressed at the high end.
Granted, we can't measure very high ability very well due to sampling bias. I am simply saying even if there is a modest bias that's not enough it would have to be huge to account for these numbers.
So, I am bringing up something else with the kind of distribution we are talking about which has more accurate data. Women live ~ 5% longer both looking at the average lifespans and oldest examples which is a very significant difference. Yet, the oldest population has more men in it than you would think.
Edit: Math: 6 year longer lifespan + 50% risk of death per year = you would expect ~1% of top 100 oldest people to be men.