The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated...

[Crispin]

This is carried over from BigScoop's nickel thread. I wanted to start my own thread as tribute to my insanity. Okay, I last concluded that for every 100pennies found one would fine 27 quarters, 31dimes, and 24 nickels. Since I refuse to count pennies, another way of stating this for every 100 dimes found one will find 87 quarters and 77 nickels.

I have only metal detected in salt water and dry sand. Since I started hunting I have found 113 quarters (stacks of five,) 123 dimes (stacks of ten,) and 75 nickels (stacks of five, with a dateless buff and 1940 set slightly to the side. So, for every 100dimes I have found 92 quarters and 61 nickels.

What can we conclude from this: I found five more quarters then I was supposed to and 16 less nickels.
1. Given the number of participants (N = total coins,): the difference between found quarters and found dimes is not statistically significant. Hence, we have failed to reject the null hypothesis and weight/density has no impact on how many dimes or quarters found.
2. The difference between nickels found and supposed to be found is statistically significant! Hence, we reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that there is a correlation between weight/density and less nickels being found.
3. I used a PI machine so sound was not a factor.
4. I have a strong arm, lots of stamina, and dig deep. So all targets deep and shallow had an equal chance of being discovered if they made a murmur on the Sandshark.

Between the quarters and dimes from top to bottom I also found: 1 thin dime(token,) 2 two dollar Australian, 1 1944Belgium F, 1 50cent Bolivia, and 1 Lithuania cent.
To the right of the quarters from bottom to top: 1 Canada one cent, 1 five cent from Venezuela, 1 five cent euro from Italy, 2 Canada dimes, 2 ten cents from the Grand Caymans, 3 five cent from the Grand Caymans, 10 one cent from the Grand Caymans, and 1 Titlist marker, and 1 1944 what penny.

1 obvious jar of pennies I refuse to count.

Okay, those are all the coins i have found in MDing career. Now that I have officially lost my mind I expect you all to come visit me in the Looney Bin.

Crispin

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Digger2]

I would like some of what you drinking! I think.

 

[Peyton Manning]

Crispin, great learning is driving you mad..

 

[GMD52]

Buddy, get in out of the sun.

 

[jyt2017]

Your verb use tells me that you know about stats 99. Yet, you failed to back your statements.

Lemmi put it to you this way. You own a company, and send out a lab tech to a site to collect soil samples. You want to see if the chromium levels exceed epa allowable limits.

Your tech has 30 samples...but...on his walk back to his truck, he dumps the samples on the ground. Only 14 are left.

Does he still have enough samples to conduct a hypothesis test?

The answer is yes.

And when he gets his lab results, can you tell whether or not there is any evidence to suggest that the levels are above or below epa allowable guidelines just by looking at the raw data? No!



And my main point. You cannot tell if something is statistically significant, or not, just by looking at raw data. Such as x number of dimes, nickles or quarters.

There are also assumptions and other variables to consider.

Lets see some math.

And no, I am not getting out my old college exam book and posting that problem...





[QU

OTE=Crispin;3477058] View attachment 828760 View attachment 828761 View attachment 828762

This is carried over from BigScoop's nickel thread. I wanted to start my own thread as tribute to my insanity. Okay, I last concluded that for every 100pennies found one would fine 27 quarters, 31dimes, and 24 nickels. Since I refuse to count pennies, another way of stating this for every 100 dimes found one will find 87 quarters and 77 nickels.

I have only metal detected in salt water and dry sand. Since I started hunting I have found 113 quarters (stacks of five,) 123 dimes (stacks of ten,) and 75 nickels (stacks of five, with a dateless buff and 1940 set slightly to the side. So, for every 100dimes I have found 92 quarters and 61 nickels.

What can we conclude from this: I found five more quarters then I was supposed to and 16 less nickels.
1. Given the number of participants (N = total coins,): the difference between found quarters and found dimes is not statistically significant. Hence, we have failed to reject the null hypothesis and weight/density has no impact on how many dimes or quarters found.
2. The difference between nickels found and supposed to be found is statistically significant! Hence, we reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that there is a correlation between weight/density and less nickels being found.
3. I used a PI machine so sound was not a factor.
4. I have a strong arm, lots of stamina, and dig deep. So all targets deep and shallow had an equal chance of being discovered if they made a murmur on the Sandshark.

Between the quarters and dimes from top to bottom I also found: 1 thin dime(token,) 2 two dollar Australian, 1 1944Belgium F, 1 50cent Bolivia, and 1 Lithuania cent.
To the right of the quarters from bottom to top: 1 Canada one cent, 1 five cent from Venezuela, 1 five cent euro from Italy, 2 Canada dimes, 2 ten cents from the Grand Caymans, 3 five cent from the Grand Caymans, 10 one cent from the Grand Caymans, and 1 Titlist marker, and 1 1944 what penny.

1 obvious jar of pennies I refuse to count.

Okay, those are all the coins i have found in MDing career. Now that I have officially lost my mind I expect you all to come visit me in the Looney Bin.

Crispin[/QUOTE]

 

[bigscoop]

This is quite significant....a compilation of accurate data finally being fed into our theory with the resulting summary supporting our previous hypothesis. Hence, from this data the scientific probabilities could likewise conclude that, "he who finds a higher percentage of nickels in the saltwater environment is also likely to find a higher percentage of gold." Crispin, you could win the Pulitzer for this.

 

[bill from lachine]

Crispin etal,

Thanks for the chuckles....me thinks you're all crazy....lol..

Song to follow.....one of Crispin's favorites btw....




Regards + HH

Bill

 

[Crispin]

Joe: I used the Chi-squared test for significance, ANOVA for covariables present, and a T test to determine power. You are absolutely correct that one cannot determine significance by looking at raw data. I am sorry, I did not mean to try and pull a fast one on you. Rather, I was too lazy to show the math as I did the above mentioned in my head. Thanks for correcting this false assumption.

Crispin

 

[bigscoop]

Remember too, that in earlier communications it was stated that the basic theory was based, "with all other factors being relevant" - with the exception of each individual coin's conductivity.

 

[Peyton Manning]

let me know when you two get back to common talk

 

[bigscoop]

let me know when you two get back to common talk

That's not likely to happen until things improve at the beach. It's being researched, they're calling it, "sand syndrome".

 

[sponge]

I think me brain just blew up

 

[Twinkletoes]

<img src="http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=828760"/><img src="http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=828761"/><img src="http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=828762"/>

This is carried over from BigScoop's nickel thread. I wanted to start my own thread as tribute to my insanity. Okay, I last concluded that for every 100pennies found one would fine 27 quarters, 31dimes, and 24 nickels. Since I refuse to count pennies, another way of stating this for every 100 dimes found one will find 87 quarters and 77 nickels.

I have only metal detected in salt water and dry sand. Since I started hunting I have found 113 quarters (stacks of five,) 123 dimes (stacks of ten,) and 75 nickels (stacks of five, with a dateless buff and 1940 set slightly to the side. So, for every 100dimes I have found 92 quarters and 61 nickels.

What can we conclude from this: I found five more quarters then I was supposed to and 16 less nickels.
1. Given the number of participants (N = total coins,): the difference between found quarters and found dimes is not statistically significant. Hence, we have failed to reject the null hypothesis and weight/density has no impact on how many dimes or quarters found.
2. The difference between nickels found and supposed to be found is statistically significant! Hence, we reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that there is a correlation between weight/density and less nickels being found.
3. I used a PI machine so sound was not a factor.
4. I have a strong arm, lots of stamina, and dig deep. So all targets deep and shallow had an equal chance of being discovered if they made a murmur on the Sandshark.

Between the quarters and dimes from top to bottom I also found: 1 thin dime(token,) 2 two dollar Australian, 1 1944Belgium F, 1 50cent Bolivia, and 1 Lithuania cent.
To the right of the quarters from bottom to top: 1 Canada one cent, 1 five cent from Venezuela, 1 five cent euro from Italy, 2 Canada dimes, 2 ten cents from the Grand Caymans, 3 five cent from the Grand Caymans, 10 one cent from the Grand Caymans, and 1 Titlist marker, and 1 1944 what penny.

1 obvious jar of pennies I refuse to count.

Okay, those are all the coins i have found in MDing career. Now that I have officially lost my mind I expect you all to come visit me in the Looney Bin.

Crispin

As I ponder your preposterous publication I am forced to fabricate, within my own mind, the possibility that your probability is perfectly precise. That is to say within accepted norms.
Insanity? I hardly think that term appropriate in this circumstance. I much prefer eccentric. Don't you agree?

View attachment 828909

 

[Terry Soloman]

I found a 1967 nickel in a condom wrapper once. I don't know how that actually works into the equations presented, but I thought it was relatable..

 

[bigscoop]

I found a 1967 nickel in a condom wrapper once. I don't know how that actually works into the equations presented, but I thought it was relatable..

How deep was it?

 

[Idigack]

if I was you id wear a hat while hunting, or is it too late

 

[pong12211]

I need some of your free time LOL.. The scary thing is it actually makes sense.

 

[dewcon4414]

Now we go back BS.... are nickels an aww haaa moment? Weight, size, roundness, and maybe some sink rate. SOME rings sound like gold.... but so do pull tabs which are nothing like gold when using that reasoning. Try as we may im not sure we can put a round peg in a square hole. When you have an known end result most times you can make the figures work.

Dew

 

[bigscoop]

I think it all proves that some of the old timers understood the value/focus of being able to read nickels at good depths, regardless where they were hunting.

 

[dennco2000]

So let me see if I get this.... you have a train traveling from Chicago to Albany Ga, at 74.2 mph.... oh forget it I'll have just have another beer please..