• Kairos
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    If this is an explanation it doesn’t make it clearer

      • Kairos
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Thank you. The thing I was missing was the fact that the other one had mold.

        • niktemadur@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Ah, yes! Of course, there’s that other half of the post - the “experiment” itself. What I said about words applies to the people involved, it’s not the mold in the jar who “believes” in the placebo, I completely skipped over that part.

          For a laboratory scientific experiment to prove something, anything at all, it has to pass a threshold known as sigma-5, which means that the margin or odds of error must be less than one part in around 3 million. There has to be a laboratory certainty of 99.99994%

          There are a million-plus-one ways that an attempted “controlled experiment” can go askew and wrong. In the case of the jars, my guess is that they packed the “unloved jar” more aggressively. That kitchen experiment is messier and more chaotic, uncontrolled, than a school lab, and a school lab doesn’t cut it even for a sigma-1 I would reckon, you’d get equally “useful” results by flipping a coin.

      • gens@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I watched a youtube video about it. It’s temperature that dictates how a snowflake looks. Simple as that.