Posted on

## Three types of hypotheses

* Simple hypothesis

* Complex hypothesis

* Null hypothesis

### What is a hypothesis

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

A hypothesis is not just a guess — it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).

### Variables in hypotheses

Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more variables. An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls. A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

Daily apple consumption leads to fewer doctor’s visits.

In this example, the independent variable is apple consumption — the assumed cause. The dependent variable is the frequency of doctor’s visits — the assumed effect.

## Three steps to hypothesis testing

• State the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis
• Decide on test static and critical value
• Compute p-value. If P-value is less than the critical value reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis

### Simple hypothesis

Simple hypotheses are ones which give probabilities to potential observations. The contrast here is with complex hypotheses, also known as models, which are sets of simple hypotheses such that knowing that some member of the set is true (but not which) is insufficient to specify probabilities of data points.

### Complex hypothesis

Complex hypothesis is that one in which there are multiple dependent as well as independent variables. Example: Global warming causes icebergs to melt which in turn causes major changes in weather patterns.

### Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis is a hypothesis that says there is no statistical significance between the two variables in the hypothesis. … For example, a null hypothesis would be something like this: There is no statistically significant relationship between the type of water I feed the flowers and growth of the flowers.

### Create a Null Hypothesis

Depending on your study, you may need to perform some statistical analysis on the data you collect. When forming your hypothesis statement using the scientific method, it’s important to know the difference between a null hypothesis vs. the alternative hypothesis, and how to create a null hypothesis.

• A null hypothesis, often denoted as H0, posits that there is no apparent difference or that there is no evidence to support a difference. Using the motivation example above, the null hypothesis would be that sleep hours have no effect on motivation.
• An alternative hypothesis, often denoted as H1, states that there is a statistically significant difference, or there is evidence to support such a difference. Going back to the same carrot example, the alternative hypothesis is that a person getting six hours of sleep has less motivation than someone getting eight hours of sleep.
Posted on

## Cantor’s threefold division of infinity

Excerpts from Infinity and the Mind

Rudy Rucker

… This threefold division [of infinity] is due to Cantor, who, in the following passage, distinguishes between the:

• Absolute Infinite
• Physical infinities
• Mathematical infinities

The actual infinite arises in three contexts: first when it is realized in the most complete form, in a fully indepen dent other-worldly being, in Deo, where I call it the Absolute Infinite or simply Absolute; second when it occurs in the contingent, created world; third when the mind grasps it in abstracto as a mathematical magnitude, number, or order type. I wish to make a sharp contrast between the Absolute and what I call the Transfinite, that is, the actual infinities of the last two sorts, which are clearly limited, subject to further increase, and thus related to the finite,

### PHYSICAL INFINITIES

There are three ways in which our world appears to be un bounded and thus, perhaps, infinite. It seems that time cannot end. It seems that space cannot end. And it seems that any interval of space or time can be divided and subdivided endlessly. We will consider these three apparent physical infinities in three subsections.

#### Temporal Infinities

One of the chief consequences of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity is that it is space-time that is fundamental, not isolated space which evolves as time passes. I will not argue this point in detail here, but let me repeat that on the basis of modern physical theory we have every reason to think of the passage of time as an illusion. Past, present, and future all exist together in space-time.

So the question of the infinitude of time is not one that is to be dodged by denying that time can be treated as a fixed dimension such as space. The question still remains: is time infinite? If we take the entire space-time of our universe, is the time dimension infinitely extended or not?

#### Spatial Infinities

Whether or not our space is actually infinite is a question that could conceivably be resolved in the next few decades. Assuming that Einstein’s theory of gravitation is correct, there are basically two types of universe: i) a hyperspherical (closed and
unbounded) space that expands, and then contracts back to a point; ii) an infinite space that expands forever. It is my guess that case i) will come to be most widely accepted, if only because the notion of an actually infinite space extending out in every direction is so unsettling.

The fate of the universe in case i) is certainly more interesting, since such a universe collapses back to an infinitely dense space-time singularity that may serve as the seed for a whole new universe. In case il), on the other hand, we simply have cooling and dying suns drifting further and further apart in an utterly empty black immensity … and in the end there are only ashes and cinders in an absolute and eternal night.

The question we are concerned with here is whether or not space is infinitely large. There seem to be three options: i) There is some level n for which -dimensional space is real and infinitely extended. The situation where our three-dimensional space is infinitely large falls under this case. ii). There is some n such that there is only one n-dimensional space. This space is to be finite and unbounded, and there is to be no reality to n + 1 dimensional space.

The situation where our three-dimensional space is finite and unbounded, and the reality of four-dimensional space denied, falls under this case. iii). There are real spaces of every dimension, and each of these spaces is finite and unbounded. In this case we either have an infinite number of universes, duoverses, triverses, etc., or we reach a level after which there is only one n-verse for each n.

Read more in his book Infinity and the Mind

Posted on

## Three geometries – Euclidean, Hyperbolic, Elliptical

There are precisely three different classes of three-dimensional constant-curvature geometry: Euclidean, hyperbolic and elliptic geometry. The three geometries are all built on the same first four axioms, but each has a unique version of the fifth axiom, also known as the parallel postulate. The 1868 Essay on an Interpretation of Non-Euclidean Geometry by Eugenio Beltrami (1835 – 1900) proved the logical consistency of the two Non-Euclidean geometries, hyperbolic and elliptical.

### The parallel postulate is as follows for the corresponding geometries.

Euclidean geometry: Playfair’s version: “Given a line l and a point P not on l, there exists a unique line m through P that is parallel to l.” Euclid’s version: “Suppose that a line l meets two other lines m and nso that the sum of the interior angles on one side of lis less than 180°. Then m and n intersect in a point on that side of l.” These two versions are equivalent; though Playfair’s may be easier to conceive, Euclid’s is often useful for proofs.

Hyperbolic geometry: Given an arbitrary infinite line l and any point P not on l, there exist two or more distinct lines which pass through P and are parallel to l.

Elliptic geometry: Given an arbitrary infinite line land any point P not on l, there does not exist a line which passes through P and is parallel to l.

Posted on

## Physics has a law that explains everything. And it’s brought to you by the number three

Jamie Seidel: News Corp Australia Network

The rule of three has become something akin to a social law of gravity — as if the number is behind everything.

Three groups of experimentalists have independently observed a strange state of matter that forms from three particles of any type and at any scale, from practically infinitesimal to infinite.

Forget pairs. They’re old pat. And 42? We still don’t know the question.

Comedians insist three is the best pattern to exploit perceptions and deliver punchlines; three features prominently in titles, such as The Three Little Pigs, Three Musketeers, Goldilocks and the Three Bears; even the Romans believed three was the ultimate number: “Omne trium perfectum” was their mantra — everything that comes in threes is perfect.

Now, it seems Mother Nature may also think in threes. Especially at the very edge of physics — quantum mechanics.

A Soviet nuclear physicist first proposed the idea back in the 1970s — and was met with derision.

For 45 years number-crunchers around the world have been attempting to topple Vitaly Efimov’s idea and prove his equations wrong.

They’ve failed; and his “outlandish” theory is now on the point of being proven.

Most importantly, Efimov felt that sets of three particles could arrange themselves in an infinite, layered pattern. What form these layers take helps determine the makeup of matter itself.

Jump forward four decades, and technological advances now allow his groups of three quantum particles to be studied and manipulated.

The quantum condition — now known as Efimov’s state — is visible only under supremely cold conditions. Matter, when chilled to a few billionths of a degree above Absolute Zero, does strange things …

If you want the technical details, read Quanta Magazine’s article which examines the recent research papers.

Continue reading Physics has a law that explains everything. And it’s brought to you by the number three
Posted on

## Analysis of Algorithms

Big O notation is a mathematical notation that describes the limiting behavior of a function when the argument tends towards a particular value or infinity. It is a member of a family of notations invented by Paul Bachmann, Edmund Landau, and others, collectively called Bachmann–Landau notation or asymptotic notation.

Two simple concepts separate properties of an algorithm itself from properties of a particular computer, operating system, programming language, and compiler used for its implementation. The concepts, briefly outlined earlier, are as follows:

The input data size, or the number n of individual data items in a single data instance to be processed when solving a given problem. Obviously, how to measure the data size depends on the problem: n means the number of items to sort (in sorting applications), number of nodes (vertices) or arcs (edges) in graph algorithms, number of picture elements (pixels) in image processing, length of a character string in text processing, and so on.

The number of elementary operations taken by a particular algorithm, or its running time. We assume it is a function f(n) of the input data size n. The function depends on the elementary operations chosen to build the algorithm.

Algorithms are analyzed under the following assumption: if the running time of an algorithm as a function of n differs only by a constant factor from the running time for another algorithm, then the two algorithms have essentially the same time complexity. Functions that measure running time, T(n), have nonnegative values
because time is nonnegative, T(n) ≥ 0. The integer argument n (data size) is also nonnegative.

### Definition 1 (Big Oh)

Let f(n) and g(n) be nonnegative-valued functions defined on nonnegative integers n. Then g(n)is O(f(n)) (read “g(n)is Big Oh of f(n)”) iff there exists a positive real constant c and a positive integer n0 such that g(n) ≤ c f(n) for all n > n0.

Note. We use the notation “iff ” as an abbreviation of “if and only if”.

Continue reading Big Oh(O) Big Theta(Θ) Big Omega(Ω)
Posted on

## Pascal’s Triangle

Pascal’s Triangle was originally developed by the ancient Chinese, but Blaise Pascal was the first person to discover special patterns contained inside the triangle. They teach his ideas in various schools online in math courses. You probably also heard of this guy from your high school math teacher.

Triangular numbers appear in Pascal’s Triangle. In fact, the 3rd diagonal of Pascal’s Triangle gives all triangular numbers as shown below:

1
1 1
1 2 1
1 3 3 1
1 4 6 4 1
1 5 10 10 5 1
1 6 15 20 15 6 1
1 7 21 35 35 21 7 1
1 8 28 56 70 56 28 8 1
1 9 36 84 126 126 84 36 9 1

Posted on

## Three ways to see an atom

If there is no way in the world to see an atom, then how do we know that the atom is made of protons, electrons, neutrons, the nucleus and the electron cloud?

There are three ways that scientists have proved that these sub-atomic particles exist. They are direct observation, indirect observation or inferred presence and predictions from theory or conjecture.

Scientists in the 1800’s were able to infer a lot about the sub-atomic world from The Periodic Table of Elements by Mendeleyev gave scientists two very important things. The regularity of the table and the observed combinations of chemical compounds prompted some scientists to infer that atoms had regular repeating properties and that maybe they had similar structures.

Other scientists studying the discharge effects of electricity in gasses made some direct discoveries. J.J. Thompson was the first to observe and understand the small particles called electrons. These were called cathode rays because they came from the cathode, or negative electrode, of these discharge tubes. It was quickly learned that electrons could be formed into beams and manipulated into images that would ultimately become television. Electrons could also produce something else. Roentgen discovered X-rays in 1895. His discovery was a byproduct of studying electrons. Protons could also be observed directly as well as ions as “anode” rays. These positive particles made up the other half of the atomic world that the chemists had already worked out. The chemists had measured the mass or weight of the elements. The periodic chart and chemical properties proved that there was an atomic number also. This atomic number was eventually identified as the charge of the nucleus or the number of electrons surrounding an atom which is almost always found in a neutral, or balanced, state.

Rutherford proved in 1911, that there was a nucleus. He did this directly by shooting alpha particles at other atoms, like gold, and observing that sometimes they bounced back the way they came. There was no way this could be explained by the current picture of the atom which was thought to be a homogeneous mix. Rutherford proved directly by scattering experiments that there was something heavy and solid at the center. The nucleus was discovered. For about 20 years the nucleus was thought to consist of a number of protons to equal the atomic weight and some electrons to reduce the charge so the atomic number came out right. This was very unsettling to many scientists. There were predictions and conjectures that something was missing.

In 1932 Chadwick found that a heavy neutral particle was emitted by some radioactive atoms. This particle was about the same mass as a proton, but it had a no electric charge. This was the “missing piece” (famous last words). The nucleus could now be much better explained by using neutrons and protons to make up the atomic weight and atomic number. This made much better sense of the atomic world. There were now electrons equal to the atomic number surrounding the nucleus made up of neutrons and protons.

Mr. Roentgen’s x-rays allowed scientists to measure the size of the atom. The x-rays were small enough to discern the atomic clouds. This was done by scattering x-rays from atoms and measuring their size just as Rutherford had done earlier by hitting atoms with other nuclei starting with alpha particles.

The 1930’s were also the time when the first practical particle accelerators were invented and used. These early machines made beams of protons. These beams could be used to measure the size of the atomic nucleus. And the search goes on today. Scientists are still filling in the missing pieces in the elementary particle world. Where will it end? Around about 1890, scientists were lamenting the death of physics and pondering a life reduced to measuring the next decimal point! Discoveries made in the 1890’s proved that the surface had only been scratched.

Each decade of the 1900’s has seen the frontier pushed to smaller and smaller objects. The explosion of knowledge has not slowed down and as each threshold has been passed the amount of new science seems to be greater even as we probe to smaller dimensions. Current theories (if correct) imply that there is even more below the next horizon awaiting discovery

Text Author: Paul Brindza, Experimental Hall A Design Leader

`Source: https://education.jlab.org/qa/history_04.html`
Posted on

## Buckminster Fuller explains threeness in the Universe

Buckminster Fuller

1. The stability of the triangle
2. The one quantum created in the tetrahedron
3. How the icosahedron, the octahedron and tetrahedron create everything in the universe

Posted on

## The Three Development Paradigms: Procedural, Object-Oriented, and Functional | WPShout

When you’re brand new to development in PHP or JavaScript, you don’t really need or want to think too hard about programming paradigms. You just want to get things to work. And that makes a lot of sense. But eventually as you go along, you start to wonder. What’s this “OOP” thing people seem obsessed with? Am I doing that? Should I be?

Fundamentally, this article is for people in a place like that. Our goal today is to clarify what these three major paradigms in software development are, how they relate to each other, and which you’ll want to use when. Contrary to popular belief, there isn’t a “right” or “wrong” answer ever.

Before we start breaking down all the programming paradigms we’ll cover, it makes sense to be clearer about what we mean by “paradigms”. To cite a definition which is relevant, the American Heritage Dictionary says a paradigm is:

A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline

Posted on

## Tetrahedron

Four triangular faces along with six edges meeting at four vertices together describe the regular tetrahedron. The tetrahedron is the root of all entanglements that shape the perceivable bonds that hold life together in this dimension. The regular tetrahedron can be found at the source of all three-dimensional forms and is fundamental in the creation of all patterns and holographic configurations.

“All of the definable structuring of Universe is tetrahedrally coordinate in rational number increments of the tetrahedron. By tetrahedron, we mean the minimum thinkable set that would subdivide the Universe and have the interconnectedness where it comes back upon itself. The basic structural unit of physical Universe quantation, tetrahedron has the fundamental prime number oneness.”

Buckminster Fuller

“Within it (tetrahedron) lies the energy that holds all life together. The bonds that hold atoms, particles and molecules together, all the way down to nanoparticles and all the way up to macroparticles, are tetrahedral. Everything that exists as you conceive of it in a 3-dimensional world, is held together by these tetrahedral bonds.”

Buckminster Fuller

“The tetrahedron is a form of energy package. The tetrahedron is transformable…All of the definable structuring of Universe is tetrahedrally coordinate in rational number increments of the tetrahedron.”

Buckminster Fuller

“Two Triangular Energy Events Make Tetrahedron: The open-ended triangular spiral can be considered one “energy event” consisting of an action, reaction and resultant. Two such events (one positive and one negative) combine to form the tetrahedron.”

Buckminster Fuller

Posted on

## The shape of the universe

There are three possible geometries of the universe: closed, open and flat from top to bottom. The closed universe is of finite size and, due to its curvature, traveling far enough in one direction will lead back to one’s starting point. The open and flat universes are infinite and traveling in a constant direction will never lead to the same point.

Universe with positive curvature. A positively curved universe is described by elliptic geometry, and can be thought of as a three-dimensional hypersphere, or some other spherical 3-manifold (such as the Poincaré dodecahedral space), all of which are quotients of the 3-sphere.

Posted on

## TREE[3]

Professor Tony Padilla on the epic number, TREE(3). Continues at: https://youtu.be/IihcNa9YAPk

Some math conjectures and theorems and proofs can take on a profound, quasi-religious status as examples of the limits of human comprehension. TREE(3) is one of those examples.

“You’ve got all these physical processes going on in the universe all around you. None of them are anything compared to TREE(3),” says University of Nottingham mathmatics professor Tony Padilla in a new episode of the wonderful YouTube series Numberphile.