Active Users:1252 Time:23/11/2024 06:56:50 AM
Yes. It essentially refers to a skewed histogram - biased to the lower end of the range... Shannow Send a noteboard - 20/12/2009 09:53:18 PM
You know, the bell curve is symmetrcial. That means, channeler as strong as Lanfear should be rare, as rare as channelers as weak as Morgase. Somehow, I don't believe that is the case.

The bell curve describes human height reasonable well. But it is completely incorrect describing people's income or wealth. There, the power law distribution works much better. If you consider the 21 levels as an salary grade, the progression would be separated more and more, the higher you go up, like 30,000 40,000 55,000 75,000 100,000 150,000, 200,000 etc.

In that kind of scale, Egwene being as strong as two lower strength channelers combined do not post much problem at all.


But that's a seperate debate, because Darius disagrees that the majority of channelers are weak. He/she feels that the majority of channelers are clustered around the middle, as per a normal distribution. This despite the Guide unambiguously stating that in the Age of Legends the VAST MAJORITY of channelers were "fairly weak" and only a few were of great strength.

According to Darius's model, most women should be as strong as Moiraine. This is simply not supported by the evidence.
Reply to message
I've been playing with some numbers since we've been having all of these OP strength debates - 20/12/2009 06:34:05 PM 1263 Views
There are 21 levels, not 100. More later. *NM* - 20/12/2009 07:23:18 PM 443 Views
RJ has said a number of times that the 21 level scale - 20/12/2009 07:35:25 PM 665 Views
Few glaring errors... - 20/12/2009 09:04:55 PM 848 Views
Re: Few glaring errors... - 21/12/2009 07:52:18 AM 819 Views
You don't get it, do you... - 21/12/2009 08:19:00 AM 750 Views
Didn't you claim that Eggy+Rom+Lel cannot match a male forsaken? Now they can match Lanfear? - 21/12/2009 04:14:32 PM 639 Views
That only strengthens my point. - 21/12/2009 06:23:39 PM 686 Views
No it does not. - 28/12/2009 02:45:42 AM 734 Views
What you are missing is that - 21/12/2009 06:46:04 PM 693 Views
I'm not missing it at all.. - 21/12/2009 06:58:04 PM 719 Views
Let's try matching that with the actual text - 22/12/2009 03:01:36 PM 696 Views
Not correct... - 22/12/2009 03:29:24 PM 786 Views
Believe as you like, I'm not here to convince you to otherwise, I'm stating how I read the evidence - 22/12/2009 06:01:24 PM 684 Views
You're reading the evidence wrong. - 22/12/2009 06:27:17 PM 665 Views
RJ also pointed out that Alivia's skill set as a weapon came in handy - 22/12/2009 07:40:35 PM 624 Views
I thought a power law distribution is much more likely, TBH - 20/12/2009 09:39:21 PM 744 Views
Yes. It essentially refers to a skewed histogram - biased to the lower end of the range... - 20/12/2009 09:53:18 PM 784 Views
Corrections - 21/12/2009 01:48:43 AM 798 Views
No... - 21/12/2009 07:47:58 AM 688 Views
True, the application of this model is inconsistent *NM* - 21/12/2009 02:34:26 PM 569 Views
yet RJ has said flat out that OP strength is on an Bell Curve. Meaning the majority of channelers - 21/12/2009 07:36:22 AM 670 Views
Perhaps... - 21/12/2009 07:52:13 AM 738 Views
I've always hated bell curves - 21/12/2009 03:56:26 PM 687 Views
The most logical answer is that the average AOL channeler was stronger than the current average... - 21/12/2009 06:36:07 PM 679 Views
and that in no way maps to any kind of Bell Curve - 22/12/2009 06:02:41 PM 562 Views
Why? - 22/12/2009 06:34:25 PM 693 Views
Can you provide the quote where RJ tells us the - 22/12/2009 07:45:04 PM 608 Views
Always go back to the evidence... - 22/12/2009 09:03:42 PM 767 Views
I'll respond when you can actually provide a few actual quotes to support any of this - 23/12/2009 03:20:44 PM 680 Views
Name an item you dispute and I will provide the quote.... - 23/12/2009 05:19:49 PM 652 Views
it's addressed below - 23/12/2009 05:23:58 PM 664 Views
I've been looking into this a bit... and you really do overstate things to suit your arguments - 24/12/2009 06:15:44 PM 699 Views
And in looking for quotes for another thread I came across this gem - 29/12/2009 09:54:34 PM 671 Views
Nice! It proves what I've been saying for ages... - 29/12/2009 10:13:41 PM 699 Views
Which is why I contend that they are about 80% of Lanfear - 29/12/2009 10:16:07 PM 659 Views
I wasn't trying to rip him a new one. - 22/12/2009 09:38:43 PM 591 Views
I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 22/12/2009 08:35:23 PM 708 Views
Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 09:21:07 PM 707 Views
Re: Except that gateway size is used multiple times by characters to judge comparative strength... - 22/12/2009 11:32:21 PM 801 Views
I agree that it's practically impossible to determine strength - 23/12/2009 03:19:49 PM 698 Views
How convenient. And by the way, it is NOT tied to a Talent. Anyone who is strong enough, can Travel. *NM* - 23/12/2009 04:36:24 PM 410 Views
This is true, however... - 23/12/2009 04:55:48 PM 725 Views
Aviendha's gateway size doesn't decrease. She is just less energy efficient in creating it... - 23/12/2009 05:30:17 PM 961 Views
Aviendha is suffering from the second weave limitation - 23/12/2009 05:37:45 PM 756 Views
Conceded. My faulty memory is to blame in this case. But it doesn't change the rule... - 23/12/2009 06:01:33 PM 605 Views
I'll give you that there is a stength limitation to Traveling - 23/12/2009 06:06:41 PM 644 Views
Why do the characters in the books judge each other's strength on gateway size then? *NM* - 23/12/2009 06:08:17 PM 374 Views
Re: Why do the characters in the books judge each other's strength on gateway size then? - 23/12/2009 06:20:18 PM 670 Views
And there you have it...Thank you. - 23/12/2009 06:27:24 PM 655 Views
And linked with Romanda and Lelaine - 23/12/2009 06:34:42 PM 645 Views
Sorry. That's pure speculation on your part. *NM* - 23/12/2009 06:38:43 PM 386 Views
No more than yours is! - 23/12/2009 06:49:57 PM 687 Views
That entire passage is in the context of strength... - 23/12/2009 07:55:50 PM 591 Views
You need to re-read some of this stuff - 23/12/2009 11:01:15 PM 731 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 12:38:43 PM 663 Views
Re: I don't think we have a representative sample of the mode in this population - 26/12/2009 06:37:50 PM 646 Views
Goodness - 31/12/2009 03:37:23 AM 691 Views
I'm working within the context of what we've been told by the author - 31/12/2009 03:43:31 AM 637 Views
Since you love Wiki so much - 31/12/2009 03:55:09 AM 650 Views
No you are not - 31/12/2009 03:58:28 AM 690 Views
Dude we're discussion works of fiction - 31/12/2009 04:08:12 AM 711 Views
Dumb Bell Distribution of Mongoloid Turings - 31/12/2009 04:36:50 AM 765 Views
Back to school AS, and you will be able to do this - 26/12/2009 12:34:39 PM 617 Views
The problem we're working with is that RJ says strength follows a Bell Curve distribution - 26/12/2009 03:29:26 PM 645 Views
And RJ knew his maths (and you don't) - 31/12/2009 03:22:09 AM 693 Views
I'm not the one who said OP strength followed a Bell Curve Distribution - 31/12/2009 03:34:55 AM 643 Views
You are the one who is MIS-USING his statement - 31/12/2009 03:44:26 AM 645 Views
- 31/12/2009 03:48:20 AM 951 Views
The pathos of Darius - 31/12/2009 04:26:15 AM 670 Views
Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 12:46:13 AM 589 Views
Re: Is Lanfear the strongest?(now) - 29/12/2009 04:21:47 PM 657 Views

Reply to Message