Your favourite ajah?

[Nightstrike]

Yeah, and most guys are at least twice the strength of most women.

 

Asmodean said:..."Perhaps in the grand scheme of the Pattern, it’s a balance for men being stronger… Some women have stronger arms than some men, but in general it is the other way around. The same holds with strength in the Power, and in about the same proportion… If two women link, they do not double their strength – linking is not as simple as adding together the power of each – but if they are strong enough, they can match a man.” (TFoH, Pale Shadows).

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

LOL ... reposting the quote doesn't change your misinterpretation of it.

 

It just means you can't even get it right the second time.

 

Oh yes.  Let me add something here.  Strength in the Power is not nearly as important as most people would like it to be.

 

Said Jordan, regarding strength in the Power.

 

For Infested Templar, two women linking have slightly less of saidar available to them than the two women would have individually. But it can be used much, much more precisely, and therefore more effectively, than they could manage working merely as partners. The reduction also occurs for men entering a circle. One man in a circle means that only the amount of saidin that he can handle, less the reduction for being in a circle, is available. Men can be much stronger than women in the pure quantity of the Power that they can channel, but on a practical level, women are much more deft in their weaving and that means the strongest possible woman can do just about anything that the strongest possible man could, and to the same degree.

 

http://www.wotmania.com/faqtopic.asp?ID=150

 

In short, women's greater dexterity offsets the greater strength of men, so that functionally, they average out equal.  Strength is not equal to effectiveness, which makes this entire conversation an exercise in pointless silliness.

[Nightstrike]

I got it right the first time. Your own quote supports what I said.

 

For Infested Templar, two women linking have slightly less of saidar available to them than the two women would have individually. But it can be used much, much more precisely, and therefore more effectively, than they could manage working merely as partners. The reduction also occurs for men entering a circle. One man in a circle means that only the amount of saidin that he can handle, less the reduction for being in a circle, is available. Men can be much stronger than women in the pure quantity of the Power that they can channel, but on a practical level, women are much more deft in their weaving and that means the strongest possible woman can do just about anything that the strongest possible man could, and to the same degree.

[RobertAlexWillis]

I got it right the first time. Your own quote supports what I said.

 

No, it just demonstrates that you view every quote through the lens of what you think it says before you read it.

 

Men can be much stronger than women in the pure quantity of the Power that they can channel

 

"Much stronger" is not double.  There is no value attached.

 

two women linking have slightly less of saidar available to them than the two women would have individuall

 

Meaning that the two of them linked have slightly less than double their average, and that equals an average man.  Meaning the average man is less than double the average woman.

 

"Slightly less" than double is still less.

 

Less.

 

Less.

 

Less.

 

Not double.

 

Less.

 

You know I usually charge for tutoring in math.  Twenty-six dollars an hour.  But then, my students actually listen to me, so, charging you would be dishonest; you're not actually listening.

[Nightstrike]

Slightly less than double is not enough.

 

Not enough.

 

Not enough.

 

Are you actually teaching math?

[Eleint]

Basically in a nutshell: The average man is at least 50% stronger than the average woman and at most 99% stronger, we can't be more descriptive than that.

 

Saidar is in general more efficient than Saidin -- thus, a woman can do more with less.  Again, in general.  Thus, anything a man can do that doesn't require uber amounts of power, a woman can do, in spite of the power differential involved.

 

The strength differential does crop up from time to time, such as when she's directly trying to affect the man's power (shielding) or possibly when handling multiple flows, if you listen to the Wonder Girls in TSR -- Rand handles many more flows than they could even think of doing.

 

Fit the facts and hopefully clarifies the argument? :)

 

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

Asmodean said:  "If two women link, they do not double their strength – linking is not as simple as adding together the power of each – but if they are strong enough, they can match a man."

 

This means that two average women linked can equal an average man.

 

Lets see if assigning numbers helps.

 

Average woman's strength = 1

 

Two average women linked = 1.9 > an average man

 

Therefore:

 

Average man < 1.9

 

Average woman doubled = 2

 

Therefore:

 

Average man < 1.9 < 2 (double average woman)

 

Seriously.  This is not that hard.

 

And yes, I am, among other things, a professional private tutor for college student in a number of subjects, including math.  And my students do well.  An average of two letter grades better than they did before I tutor them.  I don't even have to advertise; they come to me.

 

Edited for clarity.

[Roxinos]

Not enough.

 

What do you mean it's not enough? Obviously strength in the Power is a factor which must be necessarily factored into any comparison between a given man and any two given women.

 

What that means is if you have a given man of average male strength and two given women of average female strength, individually, the women will not match up to the man. The male, as we agree, is stronger than the females individually. If the females link, however, they can best the man.

 

Remember, we are referring to women of comparable strength to the man (which means they are women of average strength and he is a man of average strength). We would not try to compare two women like Elaida and Alanna to someone like Rand. Rand is not a man of comparable strength, he is exceedingly above average in terms of strength, touching the upper bounds.

 

RJ also said that those two average women linked are not equivalent in strength to a woman of average strength doubled. The strength does not double when linked. Yet, two average women can best one average man. That tells you implicitly that one average man is not double the strength of one average woman.

 

A man may very well be double the strength of a woman. In fact, plenty of the men we see on-screen may very well be double the strength of many of the women we see on-screen. However, this is a generalization. Many of the people, male or female, we see on-screen are not of average strength. There are many women and men that can channel that we do not see. So it is unwise to compare what we can see to what we cannot see and make a generalization based on what we cannot see.

 

So what have we established?

 

Two average strength women linked does not equal one average strength woman doubled. Two average strength women linked is greater than one average strength man. This means that one average strength man is less than one average strength women doubled. This means that one average strength man is not double the strength of an average strength woman.

 

What else have we established?

 

There are many, many channelers that we cannot see on-screen. We do see plenty of people on-screen, yes. And we see plenty of people on-screen that can channel. However, we do not always see the strength of those that we see that can channel. And those that we see that can channel are but small fraction of the sheer number of people that can channel in total.

 

Therefore, we do not have an accurate picture of the "average" strength of either men or women. Average includes all possible individuals who fit the description. Since we do not know the strength of all possible individuals, we cannot make a decision on what is "average." And we cannot base our assumption on what is average on the Aes Sedai's conception of average because the Aes Sedai's recruiting methods severely distort the numbers.

[RobertAlexWillis]

Basically in a nutshell: The average man is at least 50% stronger than the average woman and at most 99% stronger, we can't be more descriptive than that.

 

Any numbers assigned are arbitrary, including mine.

 

Saidar is in general more efficient than Saidin -- thus, a woman can do more with less.

 

It doesn't have anything to do with the nature of the halves of the source.  It has to do with the dexterity of the women.  For example, if a man and a woman link, with the woman in control, she would not lose any dexterity while using saidin.

 

Thus, anything a man can do that doesn't require uber amounts of power, a woman can do, in spite of the power differential involved.

 

What it means that a woman is generally as effective with her smaller raw amount as a man is with his larger amount.

 

The strength differential does crop up from time to time, such as when she's directly trying to affect the man's power (shielding) or possibly when handling multiple flows, if you listen to the Wonder Girls in TSR -- Rand handles many more flows than they could even think of doing.

 

Rand is exceptional in his dexterity as well as strength.  As an extreme outlier he should not enter into any discussion of averages or tendencies.

 

Handling multiple flows is not related to strength, it is a function of dexterity.  Egwene handles at least fourteen simultaneously while on forkroot in KoD ch 24.  Women, in general, can handle more flows than men.  Men, on average, can handle larger flows than women.

 

Fit the facts and hopefully clarifies the argument?

 

Close to fitting the facts, but in general, attempts at clarifying the argument are useless.

[Nightstrike]

Asmodean said:  "If two women link, they do not double their strength – linking is not as simple as adding together the power of each – but if they are strong enough, they can match a man."

 

This means that two average women linked can equal an average man.

No, it does not.

 

Lets see if assigning numbers helps.

 

Average woman's strength = 1

 

Two average women linked = 1.9 = an average man

Two average women linked are NOT the same strength as an average man. They are weaker.

 

Therefore:

 

Average man = 1.9

No. Wrong.

 

Seriously.  This is not that hard.

No, it is not hard. It does not even involve much of any particular math. No particular skills needed.

 

And yes, I am, among other things, a professional private tutor for college student in a number of subjects, including math.  And my students do well.  An average of two letter grades better than they did before I tutor them.  I don't even have to advertise; they come to me.

How come you didn't get my calculations in another thread, then? They weren't particularly complicated. Very basic stuff.

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

How come you didn't get my calculations in another thread, then? They weren't particularly complicated. Very basic stuff.

 

I did.  They were wrong, because you are not good at turning words into math.  You interpret the words incorrectly.

 

Don't feel bad.  It's a difficult skill to master.

 

As for the rest, well, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

 

Misinterpret away, Nightstrike.

 

Edit: You could benefit, I think, from a university level course that includes a study of propositional logic.  Most 200 or 300 level (sophomore or junior) level philosophy courses include something on that.  Just a suggestion.

[Roxinos]

I hate it when people ignore my posts. Especially when I spend time on them.

[RobertAlexWillis]

If I understand it, Rox, you said roughly the same thing I did.

 

I wasn't trying to ignore you, I just didn't feel the need to say "Yeah, what he said that I also already said!"

:P

 

 

[Roxinos]

Yeah, I know. I was referring more to Nightstrike than you for specifically the reason that you mention; I was just reiterating what you've been saying. I was trying to do it in a manner that clarifies all of the points.

[RobertAlexWillis]

Clarification is usually moot.  People, in general, don't believe what makes the most sense, they believe what they want to believe.

[Roxinos]

True. But I've shut Nightstrike up before. At the very least, it tends to shut people up.

[Nightstrike]

How come you didn't get my calculations in another thread, then? They weren't particularly complicated. Very basic stuff.

 

I did.  They were wrong, because you are not good at turning words into math.  You interpret the words incorrectly.

Bullshit. They were right.

 

Don't feel bad.  It's a difficult skill to master.

Yeah, I mastered it at the university. Might have forgotten a thing or three since then, but I used to do very, very well on all exams (and other tests). I'm not feeling bad about anything. I hope you don't feel bad, either.

 

As for the rest, well, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Exactly.

 

Misinterpret away, Nightstrike.

I assure you, I will not do that.

 

 

 

Yeah, I know. I was referring more to Nightstrike than you for specifically the reason that you mention; I was just reiterating what you've been saying. I was trying to do it in a manner that clarifies all of the points.

I think I've explained myself already. Maybe I should answer some of what you wrote. Be patient.

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

Bullshit. They were right.

 

An excellent rebuttal.  How could I not see it before?!

 

I assure you, I will not do that.

 

You already did.

[Nightstrike]

Bullshit. They were right.

An excellent rebuttal.  How could I not see it before?!

You made a claim on something you did not understand. No explanation from you then and no explanation now. Why would I need an "excellent rebuttal" to your crap?

 

[Roxinos]

NO U.

[Nightstrike]

True. But I've shut Nightstrike up before. At the very least, it tends to shut people up.

If you're talking about the "Blight" thread, then I've already explained my theory. You haven't proved it wrong. I chose not to answer any more. No answer needed.

 

 

NO U.

People making claims about things they don't get, without explaining themselves - wouldn't you call that crap? I would, and I did.

[RobertAlexWillis]

-sigh-

 

LOL.

[Roxinos]

If you're talking about the "Blight" thread, then I've already explained my theory. You haven't proved it wrong. I chose not to answer any more. No answer needed.

 

As I said, it shut you up.

 

Edit: By the way, I was never trying to prove it wrong. I think I even said that several times. I merely proved one point wrong, and was asking you to stop suggesting that your opinion is more likely than any other.

 

People making claims about things they don't get, without explaining themselves - wouldn't you call that crap? I would, and I did.

 

NO U.

[Dark Justice]

-sigh-

 

LOL.

 

Ive been waiting for that one...  ;D

[Nightstrike]

As I said, it shut you up.

By they way, I went back to the post you wanted me to answer (in this thread). I've already covered all that, most of it before you wrote that post. No need for me to answer you this time either.