I just stumbled upon the website of my District, while searching for illumination of other district’s, facts. The websites are maintained by Government of India, through; NIC, the National Information Center. (Which is why you see most Indian academic or governmental orgs, ending with .nic.in)
While these do not fare as best websites, because there is not much dynamism behind these orgs, the reason being; no Physical Organization is driving the operation of each website, merely a few orgs, operating 1000s of website across the country, only governments can be like this, inefficient. Such websites are often not efficient or dynamic or even useful.
You can check veracity of my remarks, by randomly hooking up with any such .nic.in websites. I am not saying they are necessarily so, I am saying they are often not dynamic, hence leads to such malice as being, useless, inefficient and often even hacked by pornographic sites or spammers and phishing agents. Being dynamic would mean having well defined functional individuals, and office bearing employees, behind every website. Just 3 office bearers behind each website, with desired skills and efficiency can work wonders. If a tourism fact is to be eg publicized, it would be their duty to research and field trip, on each and every aspect in a transparent and useful manner, the equipment and resources eg are to be owned by the office, from NIC. But such a paradigm is perhaps unheard in India.
So lets not barge more into the psyche of malice prevailing in our society today. But lets see what useful information can also be obtained. Many times such information can be a facilitator of good research, only complaint, they wouldn’t perhaps be as dynamic or comprehensive. eg You will just run across one line of male and female literacy rate. So that would not suffice even for a blog, without taking recourse to vagueness and out of context google search. So, I made it into a high-school algebra, mensuration, law of proportion or maths question and tweeted it; If; Dhenkanal District is having 79.41% literacy rate, with 4,71,681 male literates and 3,70,307 female literates, WHATS the population ?
From the linked NIC website, on Dhenkanal District; “The Dhenkanal District is having 79.41% literacy rate with total numbers of 4,71,681 male literates and 3,70,307 female literates.”
A simple calculation would show; total population = (male+female)/percentage = (4,71,681)+(3,70,307)/0.7941 = 10,60,305. Thats about 1 million plus the population of the District Head Quarter where I live, (eg where is that information on NIC website? They don’t do any research, just sit in a Government AC room and gossip, then go to this camp or that camp and; that becomes the preoccupation for a month. Of-course in shameless humor, me being a citizen, I have to find this number, because Government Employee has more important jobs to take care of, eg? Election Rally?)
So two notes;
1. The population of Dhenkanal District Head Quarter (hence perhaps a typical number, but we need more research) the township where I have lived a sizable part of my life and had had my college education, is, less than 6% of the total population of the district, according to this casual estimate. We need to compile such data and educate our high school students rather than, indoctrinate their minds with bigotry, like Rahul Gandhi being a great statesman of India.
2. The actual population according to the Government Data from the NIC website, linked, is 11,92,948 population, out of which 6,12,597 Male population and 5,80,351 Female Population. So further calculations can be enacted. This is because of number of children who would not be counted as male or female category? But a total consistent picture can be brought up by all possible calculations, and thats what we should be using our resources towards, rather than ruining the brains of younger generations with innuendos of politics, religion and manipulated history.
May I add one more small note, see how easy it becomes to understand an “order of estimate”; A good student, that is one with a good maths background, should immediately pick up, population ~ 1.19 million. 61.26 % male. 58.04 % female. (Not only literate but total male and female). Then even, one question can be asked, what is male-female disparity, in terms of their population. (That is, without regard, to any further attributes, such as literacy numbers, or purchasing power distributions etc, which are btw non-existent variables in India, because research in India means Governmental Apathy.)
Its a slightly tricky question, if you already note, there is a mistake in the above, The % is not scaled to 100. Its an over-estimation by a factor of 1.193, and the really smart student recognizes this, (s)he doesn’t go and change all calculations. See how all numbers came just from the first few digits of the given numbers; 11,92,948 >> 1.19 million, vs over estimation factor; 1.193 (or less precise 1.19). Male: 6,12,597 >> overestimated percentage: 61.26. Female; 5,80,351 >> overestimated percentage: 58.04.
You would know they are over-estimated, because these two numbers, male and female population, while exclusive parameters, hence must add up to normal: 100 or 1.00, added up to 61.26+58.04 = 119.30, or (61.26+58.04)/100 = 119.30/100 = 1.193, do you see how easily, without doing any further adding etc, I caught the actual overestimation factor, above, to be 1.193? Cool Huh? Just from the first few numbers. If maths runs in your mind, you can do all these, if it doesn’t, but you have the right numbers, you will be led to believe nobody would catch your mistakes, and lie about the numbers. Possible. Just from the numbers as are stated, we can, catch the inconsistency, thats why maths education is important. In-fact, I committed the mistakes and wanted to catch the inconsistency, and from the calculations gradually caught it, so a more consistent picture was envisaged.
So lets get back to the consistent estimations.
Actual male population percentage, according to Governmental Figures would therefore be, 61.26/1.193 = 51.35 %
Actual Fe-male* population percentage, according to Governmental Figures would therefore be, 58.04/1.193 = 48.65%
(humor) Fe is chemical symbol for iron.
Now they would add to 100 or 1.00 according to your choice of normal, figure, and they do, I just see that 35+65 = 1 and that makes 99 = 48 + 51 to 100.
Now we can find exclusive male-female disparity that would be (male rate – female rate) by (total rate).
(Some people would bring gender politics to maths and say, its sexist to write male first, but what they are doing is subverting quantum mechanics for their political goals and nothing else, because inconsistency removal isn’t sexism, forcing inconsistency might be, and maths whether you define disparity from male or female, won’t matter, you can always multiply a – to the male-female disparity to get the female-male disparity, as long as you are consistent, maths is not politics)
So the disparity in the population of male vs female is; 51.35-48.65 = 3.30, easy, in my mind, I subtracted from female rate, the male rate, because 65 is larger than 35, this is because its a simple maths problem only two numbers and therefore A-B = -( B-A) and if I had a larger fraction in A, I would subtract from there and so on. Its all dependent on the actual maths situation and my “learned and practiced” ways, rather than anything about genitalia attributes.
So male – female disparity in my district is 3.3 % only. (there is no over or underestimation here, since we already normalized to 1.00 or 100, by dividing the over estimation factor, 1.193. Thats the moral, each problem has to be solved, consistently, ONCE, thats the goal of science.)
Now if I give you further attributes, such as what percentage of female literates are pregnant and so on, it will only add up to the complexity of the problem.
But the idea is to be totally consistent.
Categories: academics, algebra, author, consultancy, higher-edu, Ideas, Information Tech., manmohan dash, Mathematics, Methods, Mindscape and evolution, Research, Research Article, Research Progress, science and politics, statistics, Teaching