
Re: Which prices are fake?
Posted:
Sep 17, 2004 1:57 PM


glenbarnett@geocities.com (Glen) wrote in message news:<bd343329.0409162012.4ca45af4@posting.google.com>... > tafeltennis@mwpenderis.mailshell.com (Martin Penderis) wrote in message news:<e4fa4b6f.0409161037.2f96728a@posting.google.com>... > > One of the following two lists gives the closing prices of shares in a > > certain section (company names are not given). The other list was > > made up. > > List 1: > > 84, 1347, 20, 202, 100, 829, 828, 970, 257, 540, 319, 605, 1591, 640, > > 9900, 254, 310, 541, 487, 810, 415, 370, 96, 466, 274, 751, 540, 1660, > > 1060, 490 > > List 2: > > 54, 462, 97, 2164, 850, 527, 53, 18, 46, 422, 69, 23, 555, 347, 933, > > 4216, 666, 925, 89, 96, 197, 208, 58, 223, 652, 290, 765, 98, 222, 17 > > Which list is the one that was made up? What is your reason for > > choosing that one? > > If you do not know where to start, do a search on Benford's rule. > > I suggest you do exactly as the last sentence says, and search > for "Benford's rule". It would have taken no more effort than > posting your homework did. > > Glen
Homework?
As a mathematician/statistician/somebody who is interested in statistics you should either not make assumptions, or have a valid reason for believing your assumption to be true.
One list was taken from a newspaper of 16 September (closing prices of the previous day). The other list was fabricated by me. This of course means that I do know the answer without having to do any calculations (actually I have forgotten which one, but that is no problem).
If you go to sci.math you will see that I very recently posted a reply to someone who asked whether logarithms still had some use. In that I mentioned Benford's rule. That set me off to post something in this forum. I thought I would post it in this form; a few readers might find it interesting. I have done quite a lot of reading on Benford's rule.
The only purpose your post seems to have served is to put a block on the thread.

