[From Rick Marken (970417.1300 PDT)]
I asked Bruce Abbott:
What do you agree with, Bruce? Martin's notion of how to do science? Or
his remarkable analytic discovery that> there is imperfect information about the disturbance passed by
> the perceptual function
and Martin Taylor (970415 11:10) replied, hopefully:
That's a vast improvement on "There is NO, repeat NO, information about
the disturbance in the perceptual signal. None, Nada." There may be hope
for you yet;-)
Nope. No hope, Martin. The claim I quoted was _yours_. You said:
there is imperfect information about the disturbance passed by
the perceptual function
I say, there is NO, repeat NO, information about the disturbance that is
"in" or "passed by" or "with" or "attendant on" (or whatever other
preposition you like) the perceptual signal. None Nada;-)
Bruce Abbott (970416.1055 EST) --
I'd be very much interested to hear Rick Marken's impression of Richard
Kennaway's paper, "the physical meaning of the correlation coefficient for
bivariate normal distributions." Rick?
I hope I'll have a version that I can read this weekend. But based on the
discussion I've seen so far I'd say that Richard's paper would be a rather
severe disturbance to the perceptions being controlled by someone who is
writing a statistics textbook for behavioral scientists. (NB. Martin, watch
how little effect Richard's disturbance has on the perceptions controlled by
a skilled control system).
Best
Rick