Number 1 and Benford's Law - Numberphile
video description
Date: 2022-04-08
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
N-t-n
2: 03 and 2: 30 to all my overnight mathematicians.
The reason those graphs of Biden votes don't follow Benford's law is because all the data points are on the same order of magnitude.
98. 7% of the precincts in Chicago had a vote total between 100 and 1000
The bar graph shows that the highest share of precincts had 300 + something votes for Biden
Absolutely not proof of fraud
Same goes for all the other areas where these discrepancies could be found.
Precincts (or whatever divisions they have for voting) are purposefully made to be similar in population
reply
2: 03 and 2: 30 to all my overnight mathematicians.
The reason those graphs of Biden votes don't follow Benford's law is because all the data points are on the same order of magnitude.
98. 7% of the precincts in Chicago had a vote total between 100 and 1000
The bar graph shows that the highest share of precincts had 300 + something votes for Biden
Absolutely not proof of fraud
Same goes for all the other areas where these discrepancies could be found.
Precincts (or whatever divisions they have for voting) are purposefully made to be similar in population
reply
Awst
Can someone please correct me if I'm wrong to think that this doesn't make sense? Obviously every count starts from 1 so the smaller digits are likely to occur more. I mean there's nothing surprising or magical about it. Eg if you're in a hotdog eating contest where you have to eat a 100 hotdogs, less people will manage to eat 90+ hotdogs but more people will probably eat at least 10+? The point is this occurence is not surpising. I'm no mathematician so please feel free to correct me.
reply
Can someone please correct me if I'm wrong to think that this doesn't make sense? Obviously every count starts from 1 so the smaller digits are likely to occur more. I mean there's nothing surprising or magical about it. Eg if you're in a hotdog eating contest where you have to eat a 100 hotdogs, less people will manage to eat 90+ hotdogs but more people will probably eat at least 10+? The point is this occurence is not surpising. I'm no mathematician so please feel free to correct me.
reply
Give
Maybe someone could clarify why this would highlight tax/account fraud? I would've thought a business or a person wouldn't have daily/weekly/monthly/yearly intake or returns of several magnitudes so according to this information, we wouldn't expect it to follow Bedford's law. Do auditors look at something else (such as the log of the data) or is there a bit of information I am missing?
reply
Maybe someone could clarify why this would highlight tax/account fraud? I would've thought a business or a person wouldn't have daily/weekly/monthly/yearly intake or returns of several magnitudes so according to this information, we wouldn't expect it to follow Bedford's law. Do auditors look at something else (such as the log of the data) or is there a bit of information I am missing?
reply
SoundRogue
I wasn't running into this with my Minecraft ender pearl testing experiment where at numbers 4, 9, 6, and 8 (rarely 8) after over 800 test, I ran into this repeating result. 1 NEVER came up. Is this normal? Did I not run enough tests? 1 didn't come up at all. Even the ratio of dropping ender pearl percentage I ran across was 4%! 4 is not 1, again am I just doing something wrong?
reply
I wasn't running into this with my Minecraft ender pearl testing experiment where at numbers 4, 9, 6, and 8 (rarely 8) after over 800 test, I ran into this repeating result. 1 NEVER came up. Is this normal? Did I not run enough tests? 1 didn't come up at all. Even the ratio of dropping ender pearl percentage I ran across was 4%! 4 is not 1, again am I just doing something wrong?
reply
Alec
Been thinking about the number one today.
like in physics when they use GMm/r-2 for gravity. What if both Masses are 1kg? you would just multiply 1kg X 1kg and get. 1kg? that cant be right. 1kg is really just 1, 000 grams. so 1, 000 X 1, 000 is 1, 000, 000. so isn't 1kg X 1kg actually 1, 000 kg? even if it were 1 gram X 1 gram. 1 gram is 1, 000 milligrams.
reply
Been thinking about the number one today.
like in physics when they use GMm/r-2 for gravity. What if both Masses are 1kg? you would just multiply 1kg X 1kg and get. 1kg? that cant be right. 1kg is really just 1, 000 grams. so 1, 000 X 1, 000 is 1, 000, 000. so isn't 1kg X 1kg actually 1, 000 kg? even if it were 1 gram X 1 gram. 1 gram is 1, 000 milligrams.
reply
Matt
7: 18 -It's a clue that you MIGHT be cheating-. This part is key and what a lot of folks on here claiming that Benford's Law is -PROOF- that Biden cheated fail to understand. There is a whole slew of other reasons why applying Benford's law to our recent election results is faulty. The simple fact is that Benford's Law alone does not prove anything.
reply
7: 18 -It's a clue that you MIGHT be cheating-. This part is key and what a lot of folks on here claiming that Benford's Law is -PROOF- that Biden cheated fail to understand. There is a whole slew of other reasons why applying Benford's law to our recent election results is faulty. The simple fact is that Benford's Law alone does not prove anything.
reply
kevin
Despite all the recent talk online it doesn't look like Benford's law really proves fraud in the 2020 election. as Matt Parker explained in his new video, voting precincts are basically designed to have similar population sizes, i. e. the data won't span multiple orders of magnitude so Benford's Law shouldn't really apply
reply
Despite all the recent talk online it doesn't look like Benford's law really proves fraud in the 2020 election. as Matt Parker explained in his new video, voting precincts are basically designed to have similar population sizes, i. e. the data won't span multiple orders of magnitude so Benford's Law shouldn't really apply
reply
CrushedParagon
Tons of people here using this to try and confirm Democrat voter fraud. While Benford's law can detect some forms of fraud and on the surface seems applicable to the election, Standupmaths has a great video explaining why it is problematic to imply voter fraud specifically based on Benford's Law
reply
Tons of people here using this to try and confirm Democrat voter fraud. While Benford's law can detect some forms of fraud and on the surface seems applicable to the election, Standupmaths has a great video explaining why it is problematic to imply voter fraud specifically based on Benford's Law
reply
Byron
You neglected to point out that the base of the logarithm that you use MUST MATCH the base of the number system used for counting. If we count in base ten, then we MUST use the base ten logarithm and if we count in binary, then we MUST use the base two logarithm, etc.
reply
You neglected to point out that the base of the logarithm that you use MUST MATCH the base of the number system used for counting. If we count in base ten, then we MUST use the base ten logarithm and if we count in binary, then we MUST use the base two logarithm, etc.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
