Wrong

Fortunately, however, the technique used here does not depend on the magnitude of the variances, but only on their ratios. If estimates of the magnitudes of the variances are wrong but the ratios are correct, the residuals display the random behavior shown in Figure 3. However, the magnitudes of these deviations are then not consistent with the estimated variances. 

Sometimes primary cementations are not successful, for instance if the cement volume has been wrongly calculated, if cement is lost into the formation or if the cement has been contaminated with drilling fluids. In this case a remedial or secondary cementation is required. This may necessitate the perforation of the casing a given depth and the pumping of cement through the perforations. 

The progressive cavity pump consists of a rotating cork-screw like sub-surface assembly which is driven by a surface mounted motor. Beam pump rods are used to connect the two. The flowrate achieved is mainly a function of the rotational speed of the subsurface assembly. There Is in principle very little that can go wrong with progressive cavity pumps. Progressive cavity pumps excel in low productivity shallow wells with viscous crude oils and can also handle significant quantities of produced solids. 

Although the present Good Workmanship approach actually gives conventional NDT methods the credit they deserve (their capabilities are well-used), there should nevertheless be a certainty beyond reasonable doubt that an accepted weld is fit for service. Many years of industrial experience have demonstrated that this certainty statistically exists. We are not doing things totally wrong. 

Many of the earlier uncertainties arose from apparent disagreements between the theoretical values and experimental detemiinations of the critical exponents. These were resolved in part by better calculations, but mainly by measurements closer and closer to the critical point. The analysis of earlier measurements assumed incorrectly that the measurements were close enough. (Van der Waals and van Laar were right that one needed to get closer to the critical point, but were wrong in expectmg that the classical exponents would then appear.) As was shown in section A2.5.6.7. there are additional contributions from extended scaling. 

This ion is very easily reduced to gold, and hence alkaline solutions of chloraurates(III) (often wrongly called gold chloride ) are used with a reducing agent to prepare colloidal gold. 

We will refer to this model as to the semiclassical QCMD bundle. Eqs. (7) and (8) would suggest certain initial conditions for /,. However, those would not include any momentum uncertainty, resulting in a wrong disintegration of the probability distribution in g as compared to the full QD. Eor including an initial momentum uncertainty, a Gaussian distribution in position space is used... 

Another way is to define an improper torsion angle e- (for atoms 1-2-3-4 in Figure 7-11 in combination with a potential lihe V((r- = fc l-cos2fi.-), which has its minima at <> = 0 and 7t. This of course implies the risk that, if the starting geometry is far from reality, the optimi2 ation will perhaps lead to the wrong local minimum. 

ON A alkylating agents, intercalating agents, wrong substrates (Trofan horses, e.g, S-fluorouracil)... 

One distmbing finding was thaf a significant proportion of the models contained errors, ev including amino acids with the wrong stereochemistry. In addition, significant dcviatio... 

But decision making in the real world isn t that simple. Statistical decisions are not absolute. No matter which choice we make, there is a probability of being wrong. The converse probability, that we are right, is called the confidence level. If the probability for error is expressed as a percentage, 100 — (% probability for error) = % confidence level. 

The angles ot, p, and x relate to the orientation of the dipole nionient vectors. The geonieti y of interaction between two bonds is given in Fig. 4-16, where r is the distance between the centers of the bonds. It is noteworthy that only the bond moments need be read in for the calculation because all geometr ic features (angles, etc.) can be calculated from the atomic coordinates. A default value of 1.0 for dielectric constant of the medium would normally be expected for calculating str uctures of isolated molecules in a vacuum, but the actual default value has been increased 1.5 to account for some intramolecular dipole moment interaction. A dielectric constant other than the default value can be entered for calculations in which the presence of solvent molecules is assumed, but it is not a simple matter to know what the effective dipole moment of the solvent molecules actually is in the immediate vicinity of the solute molecule. It is probably wrong to assume that the effective dipole moment is the same as it is in the bulk pure solvent. The molecular dipole moment (File 4-3) is the vector sum of the individual dipole moments within the molecule. 

Look up the experimental values of the first ionization potential for these atoms and calculate the average difference between experiment and the computed values. Depending on the source of your experimental data, the arithmetic mean difference should be within 0.010 hartrees. Serious departrues from this level of agreement may indicate that you have one or more of your spin multiplicities wrong. 

This result agrees with Computer Project 6-1, but it is not very good, —0.4244 hartrees, as compared to the exact solution of —0.5000, a 15.1% error. What went wrong ... 

In the case of, the energy is wrong because the molecular orbital is not a linear combination of atomic orbitals, it is approximated by a linear combination of atomic orbitals. Use of scaled atomic orbitals... 

---