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



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 <bernard@cleyet.org> wrote:

Is there a theoretical explanation for the Pareto principle?

bc
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@mail.phys-l.org
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.phys-l.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fphys-l&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cajm%40cpp.edu%7C46a5635d58404eb208af08d662d0a029%7C164ba61e39ec4f5d89ffaa1f00a521b4%7C0%7C0%7C636805045531182419&amp;sdata=mii14N17iFT5%2FR4O4cnx6wjdwVXxSEdfSXcMCXuxi8E%3D&amp;reserved=0