Active Users:331 Time:10/04/2025 08:30:25 PM
One thing HousealThor Send a noteboard - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM
If the Wheel of Time really turns forever, and if every channeler gets a new draw from the distribution of strength with each rebirth, then if the distribution allows for negative strength, eventually there has to be someone with negative strength.

I'm not saying that every channeler does get a new draw, but it does seem like channeling strength isn't constant across lifetimes, unless none of the strong female AS from the AoL has been reborn between the AoL and the Third Age. Or at least between when the AS started keeping track of these things and the Third Age.

I'm simplifying things a great deal, but I know you get what I'm saying.
This message last edited by HousealThor on 30/10/2012 at 05:24:05 PM
Reply to message
The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 09:44:09 AM 1494 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 892 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1461 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 897 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 808 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 756 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 770 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 769 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 786 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 816 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 717 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 694 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 720 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 874 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 733 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 671 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 675 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 776 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 674 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 767 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 687 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 703 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 703 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 698 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1368 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 953 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 726 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 656 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1395 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 917 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 709 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 642 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 728 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 816 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 377 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 742 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 701 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 708 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 772 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 780 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 804 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 845 Views
I would love for you to be right, because it would solve all our problems, but 0 is the challenge... - 29/10/2012 07:56:34 PM 803 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 828 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 409 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 749 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 687 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 811 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 640 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1292 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 741 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 745 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 685 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 887 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 810 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 811 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 717 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1012 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 822 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 707 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 838 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 884 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 816 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 786 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 799 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 775 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 796 Views

Reply to Message