You should have an option for under 40, many people work (are in office) less than 40 even if paid full time.
By the way - this not a comment about how much work people actually do when in office vs email and web, etc, which is a full topic on its own.
Although the SN1978A results do challenge OPERA's, I don't think there are enough energy-data-points for the two results to rule one another out (i.e. who knows whats happening in between, these territories just aren't measured to the necessary precision yet).
It would be nice to see if MINOS...
You are right that is the better picture. I was thinking in terms of post big bang. But as you say, everything was cooking together at the start. Incidentally do you know what the binding energy of the deuteron would have to be for the universe to be deuteron rich and hydrogen poor?
The point I was trying to make is that protons and neutrons don't just come together and form deuterium for no reason, i.e. free protons are the norm, and bound states (such as deuterium, and heavier nucleons) are the exception.
What you are doing looks basically right, but there are lots of continuity issues. If you are doing this for something medical, and you don't really understand what you are doing, you should definitely have someone check over your results.
pmsrw3 is right you are really looking to do...
I'd argue its largely related to the condition that created the other nucleons.
In stars there are lots of protons and neutrons, and the gravity is strong enough to bring them close together, where the nuclear force is notable.
Outside of stars, there are many more protons than neutrons if...
Just to add to what Chiro said, there is a semi-popular book on information theory and machine learning by Mackay you can check out.
If you can pull it off adding a CS minor (or major) won't hurt you. But just to kind of reiterate, much of machine learning isn't really "machine learning"...
Ok -- here is a plot with
% games won in green
% sets won in orange
% matches won in blue
% chance to win the point
Sorry for the bumpiness from low sampling, but I don't have time to remake it with higher stats.
I think you have it right -- its all statistics and applied math and computers. Very little actual analysis and even less abstract/modern algebra.
Math wise focus on:
Statistics, Bayesian Statistics, Linear Algebra, Optimization (both global and local), and general applied math such as...
I'm not looking to make long drawn out back-and-forths on this, but I can, off hand, think of three people I know that are leaving/left their positions (in the last few months) and now the departments are doing candidate searches. I know through either work or family several heads of...
There are valid aspects to both of those points, but they aren't the full story either.
1) When a professor becomes 80 they are typically given emeritus status, which often comes with a TA salary. This frees up money for new professors.
2) Departments tend to want to fill as many slots as...
True -- I meant something more along the lines of 1:10 going to 1:8. Admittedly, that doesn't sound super impressive, but its on order of a 20% increase, which is a meaningful increase (it its actually true!) to someone looking for a spot.
Of course the bigger picture is still correct that...
I think there is an important comment to make about people starting into the field now, compared to people currently or recently through there PhD.
Many university professors are getting within about 10 years of retirement age. If you look at the demographics for many research institutions you...
The code has lots of errors. Here is a working version (other choices could have been made). It might be useful to one at a time, substitute in the errors into the working code and see why they fail.
long foo(long a, int b);
void goo(int &a, int b);
float soo(long a, double b);
Just want to second this point. If B can't be decomposed by Cholesky factorization, then the answer will not be so simple. Thankfully all covariance matrices are ok. So this is step 1. Then once you are converted to independent y's, its simply a product of gaussian integrals, that is step 2.
To determine the chi-square statistic, you take the difference of your data and the theoretical curve at each bin, square it and then sum those up.
In slightly more detail:
First calculate what your theoretical Gaussian value should be at each histogram bin center.
Then take the value of each...
Incidentally, if you follow the link at the bottom of the article and go to the original talk, near the end of the talk (~pg20), they note the rest mass of the ZZ pair to be 200 Gev, which is in the heart of an "excluded" Higgs mass region, so probably not a Higg's sighting yet.
Ah -- so you are saying *if the bags aren't randomly filled (in the i.i.d. sense)* then it's possible that the likelihood of drawing a red goes down once you draw a blue. Yes totally agree.
Sorry I thought you were just getting caught up in the bayesian inversion and not accounting for...
First off, one obvious mistake on what I wrote to you before.
The second term of the expression should be negative not positive (from the chain rule on the derivative of (1-p)). Maybe double check that the rest is right.
If it still doesn't give a sensible answer I'll work it out...
Sorry was just trying to avoid using latex.
But write down your binomial dist. It should be
neg_binomial = A * p^k * (1-p)^r
where A won't depend on p, but will be some combinatoric.
Now take the derivative with respect to p.
A*k*p^(k-1)*(1-p)^r + A*r*p^k*(1-p)^(r-1)
now set that equal to 0...
Just to simplify life -- assume the factory that made (10) M&M's, (1) of which was red. They are put in (2) bags with (5) M&M's in each. You eat your first M&M and its blue.
I assume we all agree on the next M&M being more likely to be red, yes?
Yeah, I was originally responding to the first, then saw yours, then realized you were asking a different question.
Can't think off hand of something super elegant for you.
This is best I can do off-hand, sorry :(
The bag is superfluous in this problem.
So yes, original-poster, you are specifically correct, every time you don't find a red, your chance of drawing a red from a finite set that has a finite set of reds increases.
This is not the same as a gambler's fallacy, where the picks are reset...