News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Statistical Crisis in Science. Parent comment

Re:The Statistical Crisis in Science by dschiptsov on Friday January 16, 2015 @07:33AM (#8898448)
What is wrong with financial modeling, in my opinion, is not only that models cannot grasp too complex "reality", but that it is changing while you are finishing your model, so no statistical "snapshot" or data-set is even close to be correct.

Also, so-called Black swans could occur only within such models. There is no chance that one day c or even g could change (no matter what "scientists" used to say in journals).

Btw, finance is a business, not science.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Statistical Crisis in Science by tripzilch on Saturday January 17, 2015 @12:41PM (#8904879)
> There is no chance that one day c or even g could change (no matter what "scientists" used to say in journals).

Well the thing is, c is defined in metres per second. And since 1983, the metre "has been defined as 'the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second.'".[0]

Since 1983, c is defined as constant.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Statistical Crisis in Science by codecam on Friday January 16, 2015 @12:53PM (#8900370)
You don't actually wan't your model to be a fit to the data -- which I think you are implying it is.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Statistical Crisis in Science by hessenwolf on Friday January 16, 2015 @08:45AM (#8898819)
Yeah, so, I'm guessing you don't do a lot of financial modelling.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Statistical Crisis in Science by dschiptsov on Friday January 16, 2015 @10:08AM (#8899297)
Not everyone is so lucky.
[ Parent | on HN ]