Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

June Hum Study

Expand Messages
  • humlobotomist
    I suggest that since the infrastructure of a hum study is already inplace, regarding registration forms and so on, that this forum should continue with a
    Message 1 of 7 , May 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I suggest that since the "infrastructure" of a hum study is already
      inplace, regarding registration forms and so on, that this forum should
      continue with a follow up at the may hum study.

      Wouldn't it be easy to continue with a June Hum study?

      Could it be prepared a simular study this month as well? It should be
      easy to do!
    • A &J M
      A June Hum Data database has been created at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/database. Instructions are the same - one line per day, data at GMT
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        A "June Hum Data" database has been created at
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/database. Instructions are the same
        - one line per day, data at GMT times only.

        On my part, it's seldom quiet enough to hear it now (due to running fans,
        air conditioning, etc.).



        Arne
        Central Minnesota

        -----Original Message-----
        From: humforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:humforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        Of humlobotomist

        I suggest that since the "infrastructure" of a hum study is already inplace,
        regarding registration forms and so on, that this forum should continue with
        a follow up at the may hum study.

        Wouldn't it be easy to continue with a June Hum study?

        Could it be prepared a simular study this month as well? It should be easy
        to do!
      • coatesmargaret
        What do you hope might be achieved by this one Arne, that the April one didn t achieve? More numbers? Maggie ... Behalf
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          What do you hope might be achieved by this one Arne, that the April one didn't
          achieve? More numbers? Maggie




          --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "A &J M" <stonehollow@...> wrote:
          >
          > A "June Hum Data" database has been created at
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/database. Instructions are the same
          > - one line per day, data at GMT times only.
          >
          > On my part, it's seldom quiet enough to hear it now (due to running fans,
          > air conditioning, etc.).
          >
          >
          >
          > Arne
          > Central Minnesota
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: humforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:humforum@yahoogroups.com] On
          Behalf
          > Of humlobotomist
          >
          > I suggest that since the "infrastructure" of a hum study is already inplace,
          > regarding registration forms and so on, that this forum should continue with
          > a follow up at the may hum study.
          >
          > Wouldn't it be easy to continue with a June Hum study?
          >
          > Could it be prepared a simular study this month as well? It should be easy
          > to do!
          >
        • A &J M
          More numbers would be good, as so few people participated. The April study was not a valid sample, in statistics space . I m just responding to a reasonable
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            More numbers would be good, as so few people participated. The April study
            was not a valid sample, in statistics "space".

            I'm just responding to a reasonable request.


            Arne
            Central Minnesota

            -----Original Message-----
            From: humforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:humforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            Of coatesmargaret

            What do you hope might be achieved by this one Arne, that the April one
            didn't achieve? More numbers? Maggie
          • coatesmargaret
            Hi Arne, I ve searched unsuccessfully for what would be required for our study to be statistically valid. Can you specify? I ll participate if it will serve
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 3, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Arne,

              I've searched unsuccessfully for what would be required for our study to be
              statistically valid. Can you specify? I'll participate if it will serve a purpose other
              than what the last survey appeared to confirm - i.e. that most people's hums were
              local or regional rather than national and global.

              Other considerations seem to be important to hum hearers (see msge 6665 and
              others in the thread)


              --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "A &J M" <stonehollow@...> wrote:
              >
              > More numbers would be good, as so few people participated. The April study
              > was not a valid sample, in statistics "space".
              >
              > I'm just responding to a reasonable request.
              I realise that Arne.

              Maggie
            • A &J M
              Not an easy answer. I ve never been comfortable with statistics, but I ve seen enough to know when to question. This site gives a pretty good description
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 3, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Not an easy answer. I've never been comfortable with statistics, but I've
                seen enough to know when to question. This site gives a pretty good
                description
                http://www.graphpad.com/articles/interpret/principles/stat_principles.htm.
                This is why it's difficult
                http://www.stcsig.org/usability/newsletter/9807-howmanysubjects.html.

                Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics) for a start on the
                basics.

                11 people responded, 8 of them in North America. There appear to be two
                general populations of experience: 1) About 1/2 hear the same level almost
                all the time (when heard). 2) The other half experiences numerous changes
                in level. ALL of the non-North America group had varying levels (Scotland,
                Australia). Those that do experience changes are not aligned in any way I
                can see.

                I can't draw any other conclusions, looking at it day by day, hour to hour
                or by intensity. The only time my hum changed was on the "Holiday" effect,
                where it was off.

                Bottom line - need more data.


                Arne

                -----Original Message-----
                From: humforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:humforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                Of coatesmargaret


                Hi Arne,

                I've searched unsuccessfully for what would be required for our study to be
                statistically valid. Can you specify? I'll participate if it will serve a
                purpose other than what the last survey appeared to confirm - i.e. that most
                people's hums were local or regional rather than national and global.

                Other considerations seem to be important to hum hearers (see msge 6665 and
                others in the thread)
              • mack_colin
                ... Not an easy answer. I ve never been comfortable with statistics, but I ve ... The problem of the APRIL hum study was that there was not enough people in
                Message 7 of 7 , Jun 4, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "A &J M" <stonehollow@...> wrote:
                  Not an easy answer. I've never been comfortable with statistics,
                  but I've
                  > seen enough to know when to question......

                  The problem of the APRIL hum study was that there was not enough
                  people in it to give any concrete conclusions.

                  If you look at my effort to analyse the April hum results, I was
                  very interested to see if the hum travelled as in a wave across the
                  face of the earth, or was just localised phenonena.

                  We would need a lot more people dedicated to do another months
                  study, to get a better idea.

                  Another BIG factor is the randomnesss of the hum because APRIL was
                  definately a quiet month regarding highs for just about everyone.

                  If you go by my own diary you can see how random this hum is. I only
                  took one reading per through the night.

                  JANUARY

                  A very random month with highs, mediums & lows, occasional random
                  day that were ran M & Ran L.

                  FEBUARY

                  Mainly lows and OFFs till the 23rd of the month with the occasional
                  Medium, then all nasty Highs from the 24th onwards.

                  MARCH

                  The worst month this year so far.

                  Contimious Mediums up to the 25th, then it was OFF and Ran L.

                  In fact for the first time after the 25th , I got those tecnicolour
                  mad dreams as mentioned by others, this was because of continous
                  lack of a decent night sleep for 25 days.

                  I suppose its cheaper than phycadelic drugs. ha, ha.

                  APRIL

                  A pure lack of highs as mentioned. A nice quiet month.

                  MAY

                  Lows & Meduims to the middle of the month, then a week and a half of
                  OFF's followed by Lows and Ran M.

                  Conclusion: You can see how random this seems to one persons
                  experience. We need more results from another study.

                  Cheers Colin, West Coast Scotland.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.