Five Sigma - Sixty Symbols

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 21 янв 2025

Комментарии • 279

  • @AlexGrantChannel
    @AlexGrantChannel 11 лет назад +157

    I like how Brady sometimes seems to get quite agitated at the seemingly contradicting claims of the scientists.

  • @isxp
    @isxp 3 года назад +8

    Muon g-2 announcement brought me here. Brady, still an excellent video!

    • @AranDollay
      @AranDollay 3 года назад +1

      Me too! Need a recap from my maths days

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад +2

    @NSTartan it's never too late to apply for a place at Nottingham - Professor Copeland gives plenty of lectures!

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад +1

    @Zeldakitteh I think you'll find more and more numberphile videos up your alley... one of them coming this week is very exciting in my opinion! :)

  • @NickMaddox
    @NickMaddox 13 лет назад +9

    I've been waiting a long time for an explanation of 5 sigma that was this clear. Thanks!

  • @NSTartan
    @NSTartan 13 лет назад +2

    I love Sixty Symbols! You guys really make me wish I went further with my undergrad physics degree. I could sit and listen to the soft-spoken guy at 0:35 all friggin' day long.
    Thanks for the great videos!

  • @iPyrophobia
    @iPyrophobia 13 лет назад +1

    I love coming home from work and having a new Sixty Symbols video to watch. Makes me not think about the rest of the day but only gets me thinking about some amazing topic that they just discussed.

  • @Klodvig105
    @Klodvig105 13 лет назад +3

    Yes, very interesting. In industrial management there is actually principle called 6 sigma, meaning basically that you go for 3,4 faulty products in a million.

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @iv54 thank you - we enjoy making them

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @feuchster explanation on nottinghamscience channel and test-tube website

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @derrynator we read and care about (almost) all the comments!

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @WeLoveWong might do that some time... we occasionally do viewer questions

  • @ModernGameChangers
    @ModernGameChangers 13 лет назад +2

    Oh I knew today was going to be good. Went to physics class, went to tutor some other students in physics, come home, and see a new Sixty Symbols video in my box!

  • @Frutoses
    @Frutoses 11 лет назад +26

    I have to say I really like Ed Copland. "The look elsewhere effect? Oh, Brady. I'm not... OK, here we go!"

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @ottotechnica as others have said, see explanation on nottinghamscience channel or test-tube website

  • @mokopa
    @mokopa 13 лет назад

    "You should be here, Brady" - the sincerity with which the professor said it should be taken as one of the greatest compliments Brady has ever received.

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @stardude3396 always more to come! hope you've watched our back catalog!?

  • @masluxx
    @masluxx 13 лет назад +1

    @PBDPBD I do thank you for your reply. I however do not see the distinction between disproving A to prove B being any different then showing A is very unlikely there for B is very likely. Both assume those are the only two possiblities. What of C or D or E or.... off in to infinitium? ..BTW the only way one can disprove a negative is by eliminating all other possibilities which is impossible.

  • @ImaginalDisc
    @ImaginalDisc 13 лет назад +2

    A wonderful video, as always. I was just hoping the whole time that you're also use the word "random" error to help explain Gaussian error, because I think that's a little more accessible to people.
    Statistics answers the question, "Is this result to be expected from random error, such as a shaky hand, or particle collisions having many possible results, or is it a systematic error that reveals something I haven't considered?
    Mind you, I'm a grade school science teacher, not a physicist.

  • @johncrwarner
    @johncrwarner 13 лет назад

    In my physics class at school in 1977 we started the A-level course with dimensional analysis and error theory and both of those have stood me in good stead

  • @oldclown
    @oldclown 13 лет назад

    I am so grateful for these videos.
    You are helping me understand something that I am very interested in but is way beyond the parameters of my education.
    I am all literature and virtually no science.
    Yet, because of a man named Jacob Bronowski and his program THE ASCENT OF MAN, I have tried to maintain a connection with the current thrust of science.
    Brian Cox and speakers like you present are very helpful.
    What is going on a CERN is important to all of us - even arty types like me.
    Carry on!

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @GranTubone are you certain of that? :)

  • @martinpickard6043
    @martinpickard6043 6 лет назад +1

    Thank You. Had Sigma scoring described previously, only here did it make real sense. THANK YOU AGAIN.

  • @Squagnut
    @Squagnut 13 лет назад

    @michalchik I know what you mean, but sometimes for the sake of practicality, setting wide margins is more useful than being very specific, especially at the early stages of experimentation - as long as it's clear that wider margins mean lower certainty. The message I got from LHC was "preliminary findings are encouraging" rather than "we've nailed it". If they find the Higgs then the party will be epic.

  • @edward_dantonio
    @edward_dantonio 3 месяца назад

    I really enjoyed this lecture/discussion from the professors.

  • @DontMockMySmock
    @DontMockMySmock 13 лет назад +1

    @sixtysymbols Hey, no one's perfect. Most of the time he comes across as very competent, and perhaps more importantly, genuinely excited to be able to talk about stuff that's interesting to him. You guys all do a great job most of the time :)

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @managarm1349 thanks

  • @lekoman
    @lekoman 13 лет назад +1

    After having spent a day reacting to quotes from the likes of Rick Santorum, I turn to Six Symbols, Periodic Videos, and Numberphile to restore my faith in humanity. Thanks Brady. =)

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @funnyhead222 it makes our week when people write nice comments!

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @murdakah we finished 60 and I think we're getting towards 200 now? we're just stuck with the name!:)

  • @funnyhead222
    @funnyhead222 13 лет назад

    every time they upload a new video, it makes my week! :) thanks brady!

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @Jimmy171194 I don't think "the maths guys at Nottingham" watch my videos! It is certainly very hard to get them involved in making any with me!!! Maybe they don't like my editing, which I can assure you is - quite rightly - the main cause of any criticism! ;)

  • @michalchik
    @michalchik 13 лет назад

    @Squagnut I am not exactly questioning the result as asking why they interpret the way they do. The standard model is great. It is just important to realize that people tend to see and interpret things according to their expectations. A big part of science is making the predictions very, very specific so that we can avoid confirmation bias. In this case I have only people give very general predictions that we would find a decay peak somewhere in a wide energy spectrum.

  • @davidgillies620
    @davidgillies620 8 лет назад +1

    Standard error and how to manipulate it was just about the first thing we learnt as physics undergraduates.

  • @Tatlreach
    @Tatlreach 13 лет назад

    Thanks a lot for a reminder from my stats class. The LHC results seemed like a tangent more interesting than the stats reminder.

  • @elephantsintheforest
    @elephantsintheforest 12 лет назад

    I had thought it was something like that, the same happened to some of the staff at my university. But it was too good to let pass. Thanks for the link.

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @TheMatrixAussie they'll be plenty more probability on numberphile - but that doesn't mean Sixty Symbols can't play with it too!

  • @WolfgangBrozart
    @WolfgangBrozart 13 лет назад

    Thanks to Brady and the professors for another interesting video.

  • @Firesoar13
    @Firesoar13 13 лет назад

    Why could you not have posted this in October?
    I failed Statistics because the guy couldn't speak enough english to explain this. At least now I know I can pass it the second time, but please. This class takes the place of my only elective in all four years of school.

  • @525047
    @525047 13 лет назад +1

    @Typho0n86
    I don't consider the particle accelerators to be a controlled experiment and nor the random data values to be indicative of anything. Einstein had rock solid proof of relativistic physics whereas modern physicist tend to do things that just make things more confusing. Sadly I think we're getting another particle to the standard model, whether its real or not.

  • @JorgeTorresH
    @JorgeTorresH 5 лет назад +2

    Awesome! I (hate) am not very fond of statistics buy this explanation for the whole sigma thing is just marvellous.

  • @azaas
    @azaas 13 лет назад

    This is by far my favorite YT channel ... second best being numberphile of course :)

  • @thaandiesel
    @thaandiesel 13 лет назад

    @sixtysymbols i cant possibly ask for more, ty sir, you are doing a great job!

  • @mindauggas
    @mindauggas 13 лет назад

    @GranTubone does it mean that you expected it to suck?

  • @daweedcito
    @daweedcito 13 лет назад

    I have a question: so all data is assembled. Then statistical analysis is performed to confirm a "normal Gauss curve" behaviour of all data assembled. To confirm the results you need data ranging inside 5 standard deviations? Is that right? That is going to take some time... I am surprised they are up to 3 sigma though...

  • @seantiz
    @seantiz Год назад

    I enjoyed this discussion with 5 Sigma of certainty.

  • @Typho0n86
    @Typho0n86 13 лет назад

    @odinsraven1000 I know the standard model dont account for gravity, but i dont see that as a problem. We already understand the gravitational force through Relativity. Why does it need to be a particle/boson? How will black holes work if it is a particle/boson? They are making things worse and wrong. Gravity is a property of space-time, and the other 3 forces are properties of matter. so they are describing diffrent things

  • @oooooooooorly
    @oooooooooorly 13 лет назад

    They skirt over the fact that distributions found in nature are not always precisely Gaussian - they tend to be bell curves, but you only get actual Gaussian distribution curves under certain conditions (namely, if the variable measured satisfies the central limit theorem). It's useful, often, to approximate most things as gaussians as they usually have the same general shape, but the percentages being quoted for the various sigma values are not universally applicable.

  • @wreynolds1995
    @wreynolds1995 13 лет назад

    @mrnosy1 It's involved in the physics course..

  • @coilos
    @coilos 13 лет назад

    This is a very useful video for every student of sciences.

  • @wreynolds1995
    @wreynolds1995 13 лет назад

    @daweedcito Well the experiment's being going on pretty much full time for at least a year. It's still going.

  • @mignik01
    @mignik01 13 лет назад

    @sixtysymbols sixty symbols and numberphile. we need more videos on these two channels. very rarely you come across a boradcast where all the presenters are equally brilliant. WE WANT MORE and we need more maths on extended videos.

  • @Todesnuss
    @Todesnuss 12 лет назад

    In this case it does. There is a video where he clarifies what it is and why it stands there. Shouldn't be to hard to find it.

  • @AutoPsychotic
    @AutoPsychotic 13 лет назад

    @Jimmy171194 What particle is produced with the collision of physicists and mathematicians?

  • @jwhitenstall
    @jwhitenstall 12 лет назад

    I think there was a video about it.

  • @karmakh
    @karmakh 13 лет назад

    Very nice video of an important concept in all science.

  • @Friemelkubus
    @Friemelkubus 13 лет назад

    "The whole of science is based on narrowing down the uncertainties" That should be a quote (:

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @cooROPyoBODY cool

  • @High-Overlord-Pugula
    @High-Overlord-Pugula 2 года назад

    I haven't watched a Sixty Symbols video in years. Here I am watching it with my son who wasn't even born in 2012.

  • @rogerdotlee
    @rogerdotlee 13 лет назад

    Oh feh. I see this is one of those videos I'm going to have to watch a few times over before I'm able to grok what's being said. Stats has never been one of my strong areas of study (perhaps something I should rectify in the future).
    Thank you for learning about all this stuff, and then turning around and telling us. I think Dr. Poliakoff was correct when he said you shared your addictions, and in this case, we all benefit from those. Ya'll deserved that medal.

  • @maybe_monad
    @maybe_monad 13 лет назад

    Amazing and really helpful video! thanks for uploading.

  • @lolo2556
    @lolo2556 9 лет назад +43

    did one of the animations in this just have feynman diagrams flying through space?

    • @dexterrity
      @dexterrity 7 лет назад +1

      at 6:58? Yeah, seems like it! I spose it's an easy/simple way to communicate the "visual" of virtual particles.

  • @yousteve221
    @yousteve221 7 лет назад

    If you are looking for the Higgs boson... The one construction of quarks that binds energy as matter, should you not look for it in the probabilty range that equates to the ratio of mass to energy in the known universe?

    • @yousteve221
      @yousteve221 7 лет назад

      wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_matter.html
      Yes so the 4 to 5 sigma range...

  • @derrynator
    @derrynator 13 лет назад

    @sixtysymbols Sorry, Brady, this wasn't a attack directed to Sixtysymbols (I love Sixtysymbols) or any of your videos, it was just a general statement. But thank you, anyway.

  • @Respectable_Username
    @Respectable_Username 13 лет назад

    ok, i'm still kinda confused. could you use some example statistics to explain what you mean? i think i'll get it if i'm looking at some actual numbers.

  • @DeletedDelusion
    @DeletedDelusion 13 лет назад

    @ottotechnica I was wondering as well.

  • @Typho0n86
    @Typho0n86 13 лет назад

    @odinsraven1000 I dont think tagging on this new boson or particle will help solve these 2 big problems, so its a step in the wrong direction

  • @michalchik
    @michalchik 13 лет назад

    @Squagnut I see your point, but then to nail this they really need to create prediction about this 125 GeV beastie they have found to distinguish it from something that is simply unknown.

  • @muzuka2
    @muzuka2 13 лет назад

    Cool video like always. I want to make a request about the quantum zeno effect, I found it in a few places and would love to here what the professors in Nottingham have to say about it. Thanks alot and hope to see it happen.

  • @nutshotable
    @nutshotable 13 лет назад

    Best... channel... on.... youtube.

  • @errmoc5682
    @errmoc5682 8 лет назад +1

    this was explained very well imo

  • @MrAniketShedge
    @MrAniketShedge 12 лет назад

    Thanks for pointing towards numberphile channel, loved it :) Any more interesting channels you can share with me?

  • @707cosmos
    @707cosmos 13 лет назад

    @BROKENCAPS How about 1.00x10^-5%?

  • @hectorroche7665
    @hectorroche7665 5 лет назад +1

    It does make sense.

  • @feuchster
    @feuchster 13 лет назад

    10:00 what's with the "atlas of creation"?

  • @ottotechnica
    @ottotechnica 13 лет назад

    Was that really a copy of "The Atlas of Creation" by Adnan Oktar (Harun Yahya) in that shelf?

  • @masluxx
    @masluxx 13 лет назад

    are they really using the proving a negative as the proof soemthing? As in we have model A and model B, they are disproving model A there for they think that is proof of model B? Or am misunderstanding?

  • @GeekProdigyGuy
    @GeekProdigyGuy 13 лет назад

    @masluxx Disproving A is NOT what proves any B.
    If we changed the mean of the curve to be the expected for hypothesis B, and the data also lies in very low sigma B, then we now know that B is very likely to be correct.
    The conclusions are not interdependent, because you have two different means for the disproof of A and proof of B. If another model C has a closer average, and still accounts for previous data, then C is less wrong than B.

  • @iv54
    @iv54 13 лет назад

    i love this channel you guys are great, thanks for spreading knowledge and a love for science.

  • @Typho0n86
    @Typho0n86 13 лет назад

    @525047 If they do add this 'god' particle (the particle that was never there, just like god), would they be any closer to solving the infinite problem with black holes or the start of the universe? My guess is No, so why are they adding this particle if it wont gain us a better understanding of the universe?

  • @G.r.e.g.g.l.e.s
    @G.r.e.g.g.l.e.s 11 лет назад

    At 9:50 why not mention the use of the null hypothesis instead of "The status quo?"

  • @loko121244
    @loko121244 13 лет назад

    @daemonpacman we do for science and measurements etc, but it would be very strange for someone to quote their height/weight in metric units! we use stone and feet for those. also, in car travel, we use miles and mph still :)

  • @mrnosy1
    @mrnosy1 13 лет назад

    y u no offer particle physics courses on UCAS website?

  • @mindauggas
    @mindauggas 13 лет назад

    @CannonLongshot It does not disagree with philosophy, it is a particular kind of philosophy. what kind? One that states that our knowledge about the world should be based on experience (observation and (if posible) experiment). It disagrees with rationalism - the other kind of philosophy which states that we can know something by pure reason (this is where "armchair philosopher's" "live"). Of course these are ideal types - science procedes both by rationalistic and empiristic means ...

  • @stardude3396
    @stardude3396 13 лет назад

    This is very informative, thank you, I don't regret subbing. Will there be more to come?

  • @sixtysymbols
    @sixtysymbols  13 лет назад

    @shakemyass9878 maybe, but it's also cool!

  • @RiviRrapper
    @RiviRrapper 13 лет назад

    @sixtysymbols what are those other channels called

  • @FiadhMamaMia
    @FiadhMamaMia 13 лет назад

    @Zeldakitteh Sixty Symbols has a channel like that called nottinghamscience(or something like that...)
    Oh yes, there's also numberphile.

  • @rickitickidicki
    @rickitickidicki 12 лет назад

    So, do you like the paper?

  • @BigGreezyJake
    @BigGreezyJake 13 лет назад

    ur editing is very professional and doesnt affect the general truths of any of your videos brady, however i am subscibed to nottingham science, sixty symbols, numberphile, bibledex and im sure theres another one but im drunk so dont quote me on that- however, i still have to wait days sometimes between videos my friend!!! so i agree- u need a partener to help with the filming of episodes... and appoint yourself as executive producer/editor just to be sure that the standard does not slip!

  • @surfolydian
    @surfolydian 13 лет назад

    excellent video!

  • @jeebersjumpincryst
    @jeebersjumpincryst 13 лет назад

    that was an extra awesome one - good job! the end statement i feel, will end up being very relevant to the 'ftl' neutrinos, mores the pity...

  • @altoputz
    @altoputz 13 лет назад

    @teknotoast well, maybe a -6σ then you took an arrow to µ. And became a -7σ.

  • @VascoElbrecht
    @VascoElbrecht 13 лет назад

    its interesting that other scientists are using other terms, like significance in biology = ) But I think in the end its also the same % value of certainty, so it's up to your field of science if you call it sigma or significance level.

  • @AdventuresOfRedBeard
    @AdventuresOfRedBeard 13 лет назад

    @RayWillamJohmson Who the hell is Ray Willam Johmson?

  • @michalchik
    @michalchik 13 лет назад

    @DeanMalenko thanks

  • @BIGGGY305
    @BIGGGY305 13 лет назад

    @ottotechnica yea i think theyve talked about it in a video lol

  • @Chase_Myles
    @Chase_Myles 4 года назад +2

    if anybody is intrested..there is a thing called 6 SIgma...i think it was invented by Japanese and is used in manufacturing processes so as to improve efficiency of a plant or a factory among lots of other applications.

  • @alexanderkrizel6187
    @alexanderkrizel6187 7 лет назад +2

    So is Sigma = standard of deviation?

  • @toobeetoobeetoo
    @toobeetoobeetoo 13 лет назад

    I want a Sixty Symbols TV show. Sort of like Nova specials. Surely we can make that happen? What say you Brady?