Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Here is an interesting one:

> Ok, so distribution resulting from a sum of two Gaussian distributions with shifted peaks is a continuous function and bimodal, correct?

> Yes, that is correct. A distribution resulting from the sum of two Gaussian distributions with shifted peaks would be both continuous and bimodal. As I mentioned earlier, a Gaussian distribution, also known as a normal distribution, is a continuous probability distribution that is defined by a mathematical function. When you add together two of these distributions, each with its own peak, you would end up with a bimodal distribution, which is a type of distribution with two modes or peaks. This bimodal distribution would still be continuous, as it would be defined by a mathematical function, rather than being a collection of discrete data points. However, it would have two modes or peaks, corresponding to the two individual Gaussian distributions that were added together.

> Ok, so human sex is a bimodal continuous distribution, correct?

> No, human sex is not a bimodal continuous distribution. As I mentioned earlier, human sex exists on a spectrum, rather than being divided into just two categories. While it is true that most people have sex traits that are predominantly male or female, this does not mean that the distribution of these traits is bimodal. Instead, the distribution of human sex traits is better described as being continuous and varied, with individuals falling at different points along the spectrum depending on the combination of biological and environmental factors that determine their sex. The term "bimodal" does not accurately describe the distribution of human sex traits, as it implies that there are only two possible categories, which is not the case.

After long discussion and many caveats, I manged to convince it:

> So, human sex is a bimodal spectrum with intersex and transgender people falling between the main male - female sexes. Sex is a biological concept and there does not exist a third sex besides people who fall in between two main sexes. Genders and sexuality are more complicated, but separate concepts.

> Yes, that is correct. Human sex is generally considered to be a binary, with males and females being the two main categories. However, there are some individuals who are intersex, meaning that they have physical characteristics that do not align with typical male or female anatomy. These individuals may fall between the two main categories of male and female, or they may have characteristics that are a combination of male and female. Additionally, some people may identify as transgender, non-binary, or gender-nonconforming, and may not feel that the binary categories of male and female accurately reflect their gender identity. Gender and sexuality are separate from sex, and are more complex and multifaceted concepts. While sex is a biological characteristic, gender and sexuality are more influenced by social and cultural factors.



Sorry I don’t quite understand. Human sex is bimodal continuous, right?

When I search, what comes up as an example is the distribution of customers at a diner open from 10am to 10pm. Most customers arrive around lunch time or dinner time, but a few folks arrive at 2:30.

Most people have pretty standard male or female biology, and most socially identify as male or female. But there are a subset who don’t.

That’s not an absolute rule - but it’s distribution around two common points.

I’m not up to date on statistics, but “continuous bimodal distribution” seems like an accurate description.

Edit:

> This bimodal distribution would still be continuous, as it would be defined by a mathematical function, rather than being a collection of discrete data points.

Ok so then human sex isn’t continuous- just bimodal.


To by fully correct we can say that discrete collection of data points collected from individual humans like levels of testosterone can be described or modeled by a bimodal continuous distribution.

See: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/ef10e7e8-ab16-4b88...

From: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cen.13840

My point is that the model is indoctrinated to oppose the idea that there are only two sexes even tough it is the factual, scientifically agreed state of human species (with all caveats mentioned earlier and more).

BTW - the question whether physical world is continuous in the strict physical sense is fascinating by itself. There are real numbers that are uncomputable. Set of of all possible Turing machines is infinite but countable, because you could write down an algorithm that lists all possible Turing machines. But the set of real numbers is not countable. By the Cantor's diagonal argument it is impossible to list all real numbers. Therefore, some real numbers must be uncomputable. Are they really "real" in the ontological sense :) ?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: