In beginning, for those who might not know, I have a Bachelors of Science in Mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin. This means all kinds of things. For instance, I like and more often than not get
XKCD. Some of them are downright funny, but you need to know some math. Most people do not understand what kind of work is entailed in studying math. For instance I would not make a good accountant. Don't even ask. So every so often I find something that really irks me and that is what this post is about.
Really that formula is going to produce valuable answers? More like the company propping this person up likes the way it works. Honesty, it is not even real science, let alone mathematics. First every term must be estimated. Unfortunately, it must be estimated for a child and not yourself. I can come up with reasonable estimates for how much I use something, but my child that is a joke. What I think she will never stop using, she uses occasionally. What I think is a not so special plush toy becomes her favourite one that she cannot sleep without. How sociable the toy is? Rated from 1-5? Really it is a joke and the reporter must be a master of sarcasm. I am fearful that the reporter was serious and so is this person.
Really, this drives home the important question, who is paying the bills for research? It really raises the question: was this objective or just pandering to someone who will write you a check? Sadly, it seems more like the latter. What is truly upsetting is that because their is a "mathematical formula" (I feel like I need to take a shower for writing that) it gives it an air of authority. In reality it has nothing of the sort and the terms are so vague and useless that different people will have different results even if the time variable are the same.
This man has done this before calculating the happiest and saddest days, like everyone would agree. I guess this is what was bound to happen when a psychologist plays mathematician.