Central Limit Theorem Explorer

watch sample means become bell-shaped

Loading interactive simulation...

why means become normal even from weird sources 🖖

This works because averaging is essentially repeated convolution, and convolving a distribution with itself enough times smooths out its individual quirks — skewness and multi-modal humps decay faster than the spread does, so what's left increasingly looks Gaussian regardless of where you started. The only real requirement is a finite variance; a uniform, an exponential, and a two-humped bimodal source all get pulled toward the same bell curve once you average enough draws, just at different speeds — which is why n=30 became statistics' informal rule of thumb rather than an exact threshold.

The square-root law behind the shrink 🖖

As you keep drawing, notice the histogram of means gets narrower, not just smoother. Its spread is the standard error σ/√n, so precision improves only with the square root of the sample size — to halve the width you must quadruple n. That is the practical heart of the theorem: bigger samples pin down an average more tightly, but with steadily diminishing returns.

The distribution that breaks the theorem 🖖

The theorem quietly assumes a finite variance, and one famous outlaw violates it: the Cauchy distribution, the ratio of two standard normals. Average a million Cauchy draws and the result follows the exact same Cauchy curve as a single draw — the bell never forms and extra data buys nothing. Its tails are so heavy that one monstrous value can dominate any average, however large.

Example problems

  • uniform, n=5 - Uniform source, n=5 - sample means still broad and noisy
  • uniform, n=30 - Uniform source, n=30 - sampling means form a clear bell curve
  • exponential, n=30 - Exponential source, n=30 - skewed source but near-normal sample means
  • bimodal, n=30 - Bimodal source, n=30 - mixed peaks collapse toward normal in means