I'm no math expert, either, but that's simple math and I don't see any way to get from 6.1 to 4.58 using the data immediately above the section. So I suspect it's a typo. But if it is, that's a significant problem when presenting the article to others because someone who would make such a significant typographical error on an issue thi…
I'm no math expert, either, but that's simple math and I don't see any way to get from 6.1 to 4.58 using the data immediately above the section. So I suspect it's a typo. But if it is, that's a significant problem when presenting the article to others because someone who would make such a significant typographical error on an issue this serious can easily be questioned as to their degree of attention to detail. As such, while I understand what he's attempting to show and the data seems to support it, I can't share the article as written until further explanation is provided or the typo (if that's what it is) is corrected.
I'm no math expert, either, but that's simple math and I don't see any way to get from 6.1 to 4.58 using the data immediately above the section. So I suspect it's a typo. But if it is, that's a significant problem when presenting the article to others because someone who would make such a significant typographical error on an issue this serious can easily be questioned as to their degree of attention to detail. As such, while I understand what he's attempting to show and the data seems to support it, I can't share the article as written until further explanation is provided or the typo (if that's what it is) is corrected.