“How long is a piece of string?” is an expression used in response to a question with an indeterminate answer. But an Adelaide psychologist is attempting to answer that question scientifically. He’s angling to get published in the Annals of Improbable Research and perhaps be in the running for an Ig Nobel Prize.
Stuart Cathcart is going to answer the question using random sampling.
“In the absence of every possible example of the measure, the best estimate of a measure is the average of a random sample. Further, there is at present no data on how long a piece of string is, and no data on the distribution of samples of lengths of pieces of string,” Stuart said.
“For example, there is no evidence to suggest the length of a piece of string is a normal distribution. Indeed, it would seem reasonable, we contend, that very few pieces of string are less than one micron in length, and very few pieces of string are more than fifty-thousand kilometers in length. Therefore, we suggest it is reasonable to assume there is an average universal length for a piece of string, which can be estimated through random sampling,” he explained.
If you’d like to help Stuart with his research project you can find a piece of string at home, work or wherever, measure it in millimetres or centimetres and email him the result at stuart.cathcart@unisa.edu.au. The more pieces of string sampled, the better the result.
I asked Stuart what counts as string – does a thread that I pulled off the hem of my dress count?
“We have intentionally left the definition of string open, so it could be a piece of lint or a rope,” he said.
Ah, trying to rope in as many people as possible, eh? Well, the idea of random sampling certainly struck a cord with me.
Budum-ching. Nice one Bob
What, no one’s going to make the ‘a frayed knot’ joke?
We’ve all cottoned on that pun threads tend to get too long for anyone to measure.