Any maths / statistics whizzes here?

[scooterscot]

You clearly didn't understand my statement.

Which one? There's been so many over the years...

[sasguru]

Which one? There's been so many over the years...

Like all cretins, you keep digging.

Enough, already.

[scooterscot]

129 - 130 weeks - that answer we're all waiting for you to give with your impressive education in statistics. Yet no probabilistic approach is required, just simple deterministic excel drag and drop. Assumptions made, population & rate are static values.

Week	population/widget2	rate	population_remaining
1	100	0.04	96
2	96	0.04	92
3	92	0.04	88
4	88	0.04	85
5	85	0.04	82
6	82	0.04	78
127	1	0.04	1
128	1	0.04	1
129	1	0.04	1
130	1	0.04	0

[sasguru]

129 - 130 weeks - that answer we're all waiting for you to give with your impressive education in statistics. Yet no probabilistic approach is required, just simple deterministic excel drag and drop. Assumptions made, population & rate are static values.

Week	population/widget2	rate	population_remaining
1	100	0.04	96
2	96	0.04	92
3	92	0.04	88
4	88	0.04	85
5	85	0.04	82
6	82	0.04	78
127	1	0.04	1
128	1	0.04	1
129	1	0.04	1
130	1	0.04	0

[DimPrawn]

When Trump pretends to be an expert in epidemiology, he reminds me of you.

When your facing an extremely intelligent bacteria like Covid-19, you need to shout about it.

[pr1]

129 - 130 weeks - that answer we're all waiting for you to give with your impressive education in statistics. Yet no probabilistic approach is required, just simple deterministic excel drag and drop. Assumptions made, population & rate are static values.

Week	population/widget2	rate	population_remaining
1	100	0.04	96
2	96	0.04	92
3	92	0.04	88
4	88	0.04	85
5	85	0.04	82
6	82	0.04	78
127	1	0.04	1
128	1	0.04	1
129	1	0.04	1
130	1	0.04	0

afaik 0.4% =/= 0.04

[sasguru]

afaik 0.4% =/= 0.04

That's not really an issue, just semantics.
However Pooper is not completely thick, he's just reduced the problem to a level that's within his capabilities.
Here's some hints Pooper: read the past posts, work out what has been done and why.

[pr1]

That's not really an issue, just semantics.
However Pooper is not completely thick, he's just reduced the problem to a level that's within his capabilities.
Here's some hints Pooper: read the past posts, work out what has been done and why.

but if he used the right number he'd get a similar number to you and NAT (1897 weeks to your 1860 ish)

[DimPrawn]

Is this a gut feel or your expert opinion?

Here's my working out.



Invoice is in the post.

[sasguru]

but if he used the right number he'd get a similar number to you and NAT (1897 weeks to your 1860 ish)

What about sampling with replacement? Another hint for Pooper.