<[Bill Leach 940802.19:58 EST(EDT)]
<Bob Clark (940802.1430 EDT)>
Bill Leach 940731.22:00 EST) Subject: Re: RKC-CNTRL&DSTRBNCE
...
Will you please send it out again? Thank you.
Certainly, here it is (deleting all that did not pertain to disturbance):
Quoting You:
You seem to prefer the more general definition, that can include any
magnitude, even to the destruction of the system of interest! If
that were suitable, my restricted definition would be unnecessary.
But, as used in PCT, "disturbance" is invariably restricted to small,
even differentially small, magnitudes.
I don't even agree with this. PCT simulation necessarily deals with
small magnitude disturbance (as compared to the dynamic control range)
but many discussions DO deal with "larger" variations.
The very concept of reorganization being triggered is due to a control
system failure which can well involve the disturbances that exceed
control system capability.
···
=============================
The last paragraph is not precise (as Bill P. pointed out) nor
(gramatically complete) and should probably have been worded somewhat
along these lines:
The very concept of reorganization is that the function is triggered by
control system failure(s). Such failure(s) can well involve the effects
of disturbances upon the environmental variable (which are perceived of
course) but exceed control system capability.
-bill