• 1000 may only be 0.0015% of the population but you would still expect close to 7.6% of that 1000 to have caught covid.

    It is entirely possible that 0% of a 1000 sample not have had covid but the odds would be extremely low.

    You'd need to explain that to me a different way, though I'm not great at statistics. Why is it 7.6% of any sample size?

    If I draw a line 100m long, colour in various segments totalling 7.6m randomly in red and use a window 1.5mm wide to view the line (0.0015% of 100'000mm right?) How likely am I to see red?
    It's a virus that has to be transmitted from someone else so the red lines have to be grouped in clumps, right? They're not going to be evenly spaced.

  • As @Señor_Bear said. You'd have to imagine that wherever your 1.5mm window is looking, 0.114mm of the line in the window is red. Although, the smaller the window, the less likely the 7.6% will be true, it could be more, it could be less.

  • You'd have to imagine that wherever your 1.5mm window is looking, 0.114mm of the line in the window is red.

    My last attempt before ditching the idea and call everyone saying they don't know someone who had covid a liar...

    The red lines would propagate next to each other because covid is caught from a person, not randomly distributed across the population. So you'd have clumps of red, not 5 million 0.114mm lines evenly distributed.

About

Avatar for stevo_com @stevo_com started