Timeline for Calculating standard error of the mean when we have uncertainties for each measurement
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 3:20 | comment | added | BruceET | Publishing is a physics journal, you should probably keep close to the customary way of reporting errors. I have seen the (estimated) standard error of the sample mean $\bar X$ used for that. As a statistician, I might prefer giving the 95% CI for $\mu.$ // If you had several dozen observations, rather than only 5, you might do a goodness-of-fit test to see if data are actually normal. What dist'n to use for astronomical data was a debate btw Gauss and Laplace (each proud of his own dist'n). Gauss's normal dist'n seems to have won and may often be right in physics, but I guess not always. | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 3:13 | comment | added | Evgenii | Another question, how do we know if we can assume that the population is normally distributed here? | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 3:10 | comment | added | Evgenii | Excellent answer. What statistic would you suggest to use as uncertainty of our measurements of $\bar{t}$ instead of standard error of the mean (0.08 š¯‘ ) when publishing in a physics journal? | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 2:53 | vote | accept | Evgenii | ||
| Feb 25, 2019 at 2:50 | history | edited | BruceET | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 154 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 2:40 | history | edited | BruceET | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 2:30 | history | answered | BruceET | CC BY-SA 4.0 |