If you take the average of every average, you could theoretically have THE average of everything. amirite?

100%Yeah You Are0%No Way
capamericasurs avatar Money & Economics
0 11
The voters have decided that capamericasur is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

The average amount of arms people have is less than one.

For the purposes of some high level math, the average of all real integers, positive and negative, is actually -1.5. Not because it makes any sense, for reasons still not understood it just works in certain equations that need the undefined mean as a variable.

The average of averages is a meaningless number though. The problem lies in distribution. Let's say average A is the average of 10,000 results and average B is the average of 10. Now when you average out the average of A and the average of B, you end up with a result that's highly skewed in B's favour because you treated B's average as having as much meaning as A's average.

And the average of everything in existence is……..you.

Technically, you wouldn't have the average of everything, since the average you just calculated wasn't included

freq432s avatar freq432 Yeah You Are +4Reply

This makes me think of the story about the US military designing a fighter jet seat and controls.

They measured details of all the pilots (who were already very similar heights and weights) - arm lengths, legs, waist, feet, hands, fingers, etc - and averaged all the measurements out and built the seat and controls around those average numbers. In the end, all the pilots found the design uncomfortable and it didn't work for any of them (again, despite the pilots already being very similar in size to begin with).

Just goes to show you that "average" doesn't necessarily mean common, and doesn't necessarily work the way we feel like it should work.

If you want to read that story, I believe it is in the book Freakonomics.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.