The usual ET "idiot experts" are here again to spam the thread with their usual stupid off-topic postings...
Check y, not 0.4 anymore It's about 0.4 only for the "standard normal distribution (μ=0, σ=1)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution#/media/File:Normal_Distribution_PDF.svg And here I found some real answers to this topic: https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/143631/height-of-a-normal-distribution-curve One of the answers there says that "the height of the mode in a normal density is 1 / (sqrt(2 * π) * σ), approximately 0.3989 / σ".
Sure! Of course only the "standard normal distribution" is the one I (and mostly anyone) needs Used in such important risk/reward/pWin calculations like this and this. Man, I think I just found the HolyGrail™ , so this discussion was very fruitful for me
My objection was/is why they (in the standard case) don't simply peak at 0.5 as it's intuitive to grasp the stuff like p(z=0)=0.5. I now understand that it might have to do with the integral calculation of the area, but IMO it's irrelevant in this visual case as depicted in the OP.
Hey @rb7, you POS, you know very well that you are blocked by me, but you POS can't stay away from my threads...
you need to standardize it, set standard deviation 1. in financial sampling, you have to standardize it, skewness, kurtosis, z score, p score, shit load of complications. there is a standardize function in excel.