Recently, I was looking at some slides from a data science course, and one statement was presented rather matter-of-factly:

The normal distribution is often a good model for variation in natural phenomena.

That caught me off guard and sent me down a rabbit hole into probability theory and the Central Limit Theorem. I think I have a decent intuitive grasp of why the CLT works, so I don’t necessarily need a full proof (though I wouldn’t mind one). What I’m really trying to understand is why it’s considered so significant.

Yes, the theorem tells us that the sampling distribution of the mean tends toward normality but why is that such a big deal? It feels like we’re shifting the focus to averages rather than addressing the underlying population directly. We can make statements about the mean, but that seems somewhat limited. It almost feels like we’re reframing—if not avoiding—the original question we care about.

  • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    3blue1brown have a series on that.

    Afaiu, it’s because it’s simplify a lot of statistics. If you don’t know the underlying distribution of the population you are studying, you can be sure that taking a lot of samples and taking the mean of that you are going to get a normal with a mean that is the same as the population.