Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] Pareto

Another rule of thumb when no better data are available:

You can raise the price by 10% without seeing much customer rejection:
You can add 10% identifiably different ethnic folks to a culture without triggering adverse public response;
You can vary the ingredients in the recipe by 10% without the result
 becoming a disaster.

Brian W

On 12/15/2018 3:39 PM, Albert J. Mallinckrodt wrote:
Here’s my “theoretical explanation." Consider the possibilities:

1. 95% from 5%
2. 80% from 20%
4. 60% from 40%

Number 1 certainly happens, but it’s getting damn close to “only one thing is important” Number 3 also happens, but it isn’t more than a stone’s throw from “everything is equally important.” Processes that obey those principles just don’t get thought of in the same way as things that “obey” Pareto’s principle. Throw in a little tolerance for variation and everything else, say 70 to 90% from 30 to 10% looks like fundamentally confirming evidence for Pareto.

John Mallinckrodt
Cal Poly Pomona

On Dec 15, 2018, at 1:02 PM, bernard cleyet <> wrote:

Is there a theoretical explanation for the Pareto principle?

Forum for Physics Educators