Stack exchange

CSGnet Archive CSG2019
21

Philip

···

-----Original Message-----
From: pyeranos@ucla.edu (via csgnet Mailing List)
<csgnet@lists.illinois.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 11:23 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Stack exchange

Where have I ever refused to use PCT terminology.

HB : I'm sorry to say it Philip, but I don't remember when you used real PCT
terminology for expressing your thoughts about PCT.

PY earlier :... we can express ourselves in a way that doesn't specifically
involve PCT vocabulary.

HB : The question is : how do we now that you are talking about PCT ?

PY : One time I suggested that we remove the words "a perception of" in the
phrase "controlling a perception of a variable" because it is undue
pedagogy.

PY : If you really want to help distinguish feedback control from
feedforward control, which seems to be one of the main points, if not the
only main point of PCT, I suggest fixing the corresponding demo on this
site.
http://www.pct-labs.com/tutorial1/index.html

HB : Right. I usually say that PCT needs upgrade. And this is the case
which needs full experimental support and "filtering" of terms and thus
clearing the fog about what PCT is.

Let us say that I would hypothetically offer suggestion :

1. We start new project for ex. "PCT Experimental book - Control of
perception" and we all sign needed agreements.

2. I give the whole PCT starting explanation for experiments and anyone on
CSGnet can make experiment on his own cboice after having consultation with
me. If not I can advice experiment on basis of knowing you through
discussions on CSGnet.

3. All results from members who will cooperate (also Barb and Allie could be
welcome) can be handled by Bruce Abbott and Rick Marken statistics).
Linguistic arrangments can be done by Bruce Nevin and so on.

4. Interpretation of results can be done by all members and thus all members
will be acquanted with PCT through practice. I'm sure that everyone could
grasp the essence of PCT.

5. We celebrate success on some CSGnet meeting presenting the results and
real experimental PCT to all American scientist that touch the scientific
field of PCT. Also members can invite experts from other countries on the
World. I assume it can be a "PCT bum" in the World scientific community. Why
? Because will be sure that what we are presenting about PCT has real Life
essence.

What would you say on this hypothetical suggestion ? Any other oppinion ?

Best,

Boris

22

Philip, you just wrote that ...

PY earlier : Where have I ever refused to use PCT terminology.

HB : Why don't you do so. Don't listen to Rick. His interpretation is not
necessarilly PCT terminology. Form your own oppinion on the basis of PCT
Glossary if you want to talk about PCT.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: pyeranos@ucla.edu (via csgnet Mailing List)
<csgnet@lists.illinois.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 12:13 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

PY : In that sense it would be best to just call perceptions functions.

HB : Whatever your translation of "perceptions functions" mean I don't see
that you understand what in PCT sense is going on in "Input function".

Bill P :
INPUT FUNCTION : The portion of a system that receives signals or stimuli
from outside the system, and generates a perceptual signal that is some
function of the received signals or stimuli.

HB : It's not exact function, it's "SOME FUNCTION", because whatever you
perceive from environment you can't be always sure that you perceived
exactly as it is, because transformations in sense organs and in afferent
nerve fibres are as many as there are people. I'll emphasize here good
description of Bruce Nevin what is happening in "nerv pathway". You can also
see that I never "borrowed" knowledge from others and show it as my own like
Bruce Nevin and Rick are doing. If you'll go through archives and read my
writings you'll meet many authors I citated when I found something what is
at least near to PCT.

For example I'm sure that you find yourself in situation when some of you
couldn't agree about the color you were perceiving. Or have you ever seen
that whitnesses of car accident agreed about the same description of what
happened. There are as many stories as there are whitnesses. So what exactly
they were perceiving ? Policemen job is very difficult to extract what
really happened and to eliminate imagination and lies from whitness
statements. Ask them or judges who I beleive have difficultes to extract
lies, manipulations and so on...performed by whitnesses and lawyers. It's
not coincidence that common sense wisdom says : "Every eye has it's own
painter".

I hope you understand what I meant by PCT terminology and what I meant about
understanding PCT with that terminology. It's of course my interpretation
but for basis I used PCT exact terminological description.

That's what I'm doing since I'm on CSGnet. Check archives. It's not like
Bruce Nevin, who is changing his mind under my interpretation of PCT trying
to show it as his wisdom, selling it to you.. And he was the one who was
using heartless his phylosohy and terminology although I warned him every
time he did that. You can see traces of his discourses and his own diagrams
(different from PCT diagram) all over CSGnet archives. And my answers too.
It's not hard to prove who is "selling" what.

Best,

Boris

23

[From Bruce Nevin 2019126.09:12 ET]

Philip Yeranosian Dec 23, 2019, 1:19 PM –
I meant to say it like this: the more tolerant you are of others the less tolerant you are of yourself. So roughly, when you appreciate others you often belittle yourself privately.

Bruce Nevin 2019122~.06:45ET–
What perceptual variables would you guess are being controlled in “belittling” and “tolerating”? (As you understand these words.) … For each of these hypothetical perceptual variables, how would you test whether the person doing the “belittling” or “tolerating” or an alternative is in fact perceiving that variable and controlling it?

Boris Hartman Dec 26, 2019, 1:13 AM –
You can’t. That’s why I kept telling for years that you can’t control other people all the time

BN:
Are you saying that the test for controlled variables is an attempt to control other people?

···

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 1:13 AM “Boris Hartman” csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

Philip, you just wrote that …

PY earlier : Where have I ever refused to use PCT terminology.

HB : Why don’t you do so. Don’t listen to Rick. His interpretation is not

necessarilly PCT terminology. Form your own oppinion on the basis of PCT

Glossary if you want to talk about PCT.

-----Original Message-----

From: pyeranos@ucla.edu (via csgnet Mailing List)

csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 12:13 AM

To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

PY : In that sense it would be best to just call perceptions functions.

HB : Whatever your translation of “perceptions functions” mean I don’t see

that you understand what in PCT sense is going on in “Input function”.

Bill P :

INPUT FUNCTION : The portion of a system that receives signals or stimuli

from outside the system, and generates a perceptual signal that is some

function of the received signals or stimuli.

HB : It’s not exact function, it’s “SOME FUNCTION”, because whatever you

perceive from environment you can’t be always sure that you perceived

exactly as it is, because transformations in sense organs and in afferent

nerve fibres are as many as there are people. I’ll emphasize here good

description of Bruce Nevin what is happening in “nerv pathway”. You can also

see that I never “borrowed” knowledge from others and show it as my own like

Bruce Nevin and Rick are doing. If you’ll go through archives and read my

writings you’ll meet many authors I citated when I found something what is

at least near to PCT.

For example I’m sure that you find yourself in situation when some of you

couldn’t agree about the color you were perceiving. Or have you ever seen

that whitnesses of car accident agreed about the same description of what

happened. There are as many stories as there are whitnesses. So what exactly

they were perceiving ? Policemen job is very difficult to extract what

really happened and to eliminate imagination and lies from whitness

statements. Ask them or judges who I beleive have difficultes to extract

lies, manipulations and so on…performed by whitnesses and lawyers. It’s

not coincidence that common sense wisdom says : "Every eye has it’s own

painter".

I hope you understand what I meant by PCT terminology and what I meant about

understanding PCT with that terminology. It’s of course my interpretation

but for basis I used PCT exact terminological description.

That’s what I’m doing since I’m on CSGnet. Check archives. It’s not like

Bruce Nevin, who is changing his mind under my interpretation of PCT trying

to show it as his wisdom, selling it to you… And he was the one who was

using heartless his phylosohy and terminology although I warned him every

time he did that. You can see traces of his discourses and his own diagrams

(different from PCT diagram) all over CSGnet archives. And my answers too.

It’s not hard to prove who is “selling” what.

Best,

Boris

24

From Fred Nickols 2019.12.26.1102 ET

Not always but I would bet it is on some occasions.

···

Fred Nickols
Solution Engineer & Chief Toolmaker
Distance Consulting LLC
“Assistance at A Distance�
www.nickols.us

25

Bruce,

I don’t understand whether you are acting like you don’t understand or you really don’t understand. I’ve explained this so many times… Think a little what TCV is and experimenting in PCT means and conclussions Rick made in the past.

Bill P :

There is another demonstration/game/experiment that seems to help The Test and it’s aplication to experiments.

You have to understand why Rick proclaimed PCT as science of “people controlling people all the time”… Although he changed his mind latter and used my idea in his book. You are using my interpretations of Bills work and other critics for your own promotion (like in the case with Philip) and changing your mind.

After the book is out we’ll have plenty of time talking about who understands what. But we need something clearly written so that there will be no manipulations and excuses in the style "we already knew that "… It’s obviously that you don’t… PCT is so deep scientifically supported science that is very hard to get to it’s end. And you are on the starting position where I was aproximatelly 10 years ago when I proposed arrow to diagram p. 191 (B.CP, 2005). Ask Martin why he wanted to visit me in that time ?

Do you have any idea where is the end ? You’ll have first to understand basic control loop (you didn’t say anything about my proposal although you and Rick show clearly total misunderstanding using strange terminology and concepts) and than hard work with diagram on p. 191 (B:CP, 2005) and so on. Do you really want to contribute to PCT progress or not ? Or you’ll stay on the level of wording and “mixing” air arround and repeat after me like a “parrot”.

BN earlier : Likewise, you must use the terminology and concepts of Perceptual Control Theory in order to engage with the purposes of this forum

BN earlier : If we don’t use PCT concepts and terminology either explicitly or implicitly how is the question relevant to PCT?

HB : Or it’s maybe about that you take care only of yourself ? That’s what normal LCS would do. But all LCS are not the same. They are different.

Boris

···

From: Bruce Nevin (bnhpct@gmail.com via csgnet Mailing List) csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 3:17 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

[From Bruce Nevin 2019126.09:12 ET]

Philip Yeranosian Dec 23, 2019, 1:19 PM –
I meant to say it like this: the more tolerant you are of others the less tolerant you are of yourself. So roughly, when you appreciate others you often belittle yourself privately.

Bruce Nevin 2019122~.06:45ET–
What perceptual variables would you guess are being controlled in “belittling” and “tolerating”? (As you understand these words.) … For each of these hypothetical perceptual variables, how would you test whether the person doing the “belittling” or “tolerating” or an alternative is in fact perceiving that variable and controlling it?

Boris Hartman Dec 26, 2019, 1:13 AM –
You can’t. That’s why I kept telling for years that you can’t control other people all the time

BN:
Are you saying that the test for controlled variables is an attempt to control other people?

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 1:13 AM “Boris Hartman” csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

Philip, you just wrote that …

PY earlier : Where have I ever refused to use PCT terminology.

HB : Why don’t you do so. Don’t listen to Rick. His interpretation is not
necessarilly PCT terminology. Form your own oppinion on the basis of PCT
Glossary if you want to talk about PCT.

-----Original Message-----
From: pyeranos@ucla.edu (via csgnet Mailing List)
csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 12:13 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

PY : In that sense it would be best to just call perceptions functions.

HB : Whatever your translation of “perceptions functions” mean I don’t see
that you understand what in PCT sense is going on in “Input function”.

Bill P :
INPUT FUNCTION : The portion of a system that receives signals or stimuli
from outside the system, and generates a perceptual signal that is some
function of the received signals or stimuli.

HB : It’s not exact function, it’s “SOME FUNCTION”, because whatever you
perceive from environment you can’t be always sure that you perceived
exactly as it is, because transformations in sense organs and in afferent
nerve fibres are as many as there are people. I’ll emphasize here good
description of Bruce Nevin what is happening in “nerv pathway”. You can also
see that I never “borrowed” knowledge from others and show it as my own like
Bruce Nevin and Rick are doing. If you’ll go through archives and read my
writings you’ll meet many authors I citated when I found something what is
at least near to PCT.

For example I’m sure that you find yourself in situation when some of you
couldn’t agree about the color you were perceiving. Or have you ever seen
that whitnesses of car accident agreed about the same description of what
happened. There are as many stories as there are whitnesses. So what exactly
they were perceiving ? Policemen job is very difficult to extract what
really happened and to eliminate imagination and lies from whitness
statements. Ask them or judges who I beleive have difficultes to extract
lies, manipulations and so on…performed by whitnesses and lawyers. It’s
not coincidence that common sense wisdom says : “Every eye has it’s own
painter”.

I hope you understand what I meant by PCT terminology and what I meant about
understanding PCT with that terminology. It’s of course my interpretation
but for basis I used PCT exact terminological description.

That’s what I’m doing since I’m on CSGnet. Check archives. It’s not like
Bruce Nevin, who is changing his mind under my interpretation of PCT trying
to show it as his wisdom, selling it to you… And he was the one who was
using heartless his phylosohy and terminology although I warned him every
time he did that. You can see traces of his discourses and his own diagrams
(different from PCT diagram) all over CSGnet archives. And my answers too.
It’s not hard to prove who is “selling” what.

Best,

Boris

26

Boris,

You might be right.

···

On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 3:29 AM “Boris Hartman” csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

Bruce,

Â

I don’t understand whether you are acting like you don’t understand or you really don’t understand. I’ve explained this so many times… Think a little what TCV is and experimenting in PCT means and conclussions Rick made in the past.

Â

Bill P :

There is another demonstration/game/experiment that seems to help The Test and it’s aplication to experiments.

Â

You have to understand why Rick proclaimed PCT as science of "people controlling people all the time"… Although he changed his mind latter and used my idea in his book… You are using my interpretations of Bills work and other critics for your own promotion (like in the case with Philip) and changing your mind.

Â

After the book is out we’ll have plenty of time talking about who understands what. But we need something clearly written so that there will be no manipulations and excuses in the style "we already knew that "… It’s obviously that you don’t… PCT is so deep scientifically supported science that is very hard to get to it’s end. And you are on the starting position where I was aproximatelly 10 years ago when I proposed arrow to diagram p. 191 (B.CP, 2005). Ask Martin why he wanted to visit me in that time ?

Â

Do you have any idea where is the end ? You’ll have first to understand basic control loop (you didn’t say anything about my proposal although you and Rick show clearly total misunderstanding using strange terminology and concepts) and than hard work with diagram on p. 191 (B:CP, 2005) and so on. Do you really want to contribute to PCT progress or not ? Or you’ll stay on the level of wording and “mixing” air arround and repeat after me like a “parrot”.

Â

BN earlier : Likewise, you must use the terminology and concepts of Perceptual Control Theory in order to engage with the purposes of this forum

Â

BN earlier : If we don’t use PCT concepts and terminology either explicitly or implicitly how is the question relevant to PCT?

Â

Â

HB : Or it’s maybe about that you take care only of yourself ? That’s what normal LCS would do. But all LCS are not the same. They are different.

Â

Boris

Â

Â

From: Bruce Nevin (bnhpct@gmail.com via csgnet Mailing List) csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 3:17 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

Â

[From Bruce Nevin 2019126.09:12 ET]

Philip Yeranosian Dec 23, 2019, 1:19 PM –
I meant to say it like this: the more tolerant you are of others the less tolerant you are of yourself. So roughly, when you appreciate others you often belittle yourself privately. Â

Bruce Nevin 2019122~.06:45ET–
What perceptual variables would you guess are being controlled in “belittling” and “tolerating”? (As you understand these words.) … For each of these hypothetical perceptual variables, how would you test whether the person doing the “belittling” or “tolerating” or an alternative is in fact perceiving that variable and controlling it?

Boris Hartman Dec 26, 2019, 1:13 AM –
You can’t. That’s why I kept telling for years that you can’t control other people all the time

Â

BN:
Are you saying that the test for controlled variables is an attempt to control other people?

Â

Â

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 1:13 AM “Boris Hartman” csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

Philip, you just wrote that …

PY earlier : Where have I ever refused to use PCT terminology.

HB : Why don’t you do so. Don’t listen to Rick. His interpretation is not
necessarilly PCT terminology. Form your own oppinion on the basis of PCT
Glossary if you want to talk about PCT.

-----Original Message-----
From: pyeranos@ucla.edu (via csgnet Mailing List)
csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 12:13 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Stack exchange

PY : In that sense it would be best to just call perceptions functions.

HB : Whatever your translation of “perceptions functions” mean I don’t see
that you understand what in PCT sense is going on in “Input function”.

Bill P :
INPUT FUNCTION : The portion of a system that receives signals or stimuli
from outside the system, and generates a perceptual signal that is some
function of the received signals or stimuli.

HB : It’s not exact function, it’s “SOME FUNCTION”, because whatever you
perceive from environment you can’t be always sure that you perceived
exactly as it is, because transformations in sense organs and in afferent
nerve fibres are as many as there are people. I’ll emphasize here good
description of Bruce Nevin what is happening in “nerv pathway”. You can also
see that I never “borrowed” knowledge from others and show it as my own like
Bruce Nevin and Rick are doing. If you’ll go through archives and read my
writings you’ll meet many authors I citated when I found something what is
at least near to PCT.Â

For example I’m sure that you find yourself in situation when some of you
couldn’t agree about the color you were perceiving. Or have you ever seen
that whitnesses of car accident agreed about the same description of what
happened. There are as many stories as there are whitnesses. So what exactly
they were perceiving ? Policemen job is very difficult to extract what
really happened and to eliminate imagination and lies from whitness
statements. Ask them or judges who I beleive have difficultes to extract
lies, manipulations and so on…performed by whitnesses and lawyers. It’s
not coincidence that common sense wisdom says : “Every eye has it’s own
painter”.

I hope you understand what I meant by PCT terminology and what I meant about
understanding PCT with that terminology. It’s of course my interpretation
but for basis I used PCT exact terminological description.

That’s what I’m doing since I’m on CSGnet. Check archives. It’s not like
Bruce Nevin, who is changing his mind under my interpretation of PCT trying
to show it as his wisdom, selling it to you… And he was the one who was
using heartless his phylosohy and terminology although I warned him every
time he did that. You can see traces of his discourses and his own diagrams
(different from PCT diagram) all over CSGnet archives. And my answers too.
It’s not hard to prove who is “selling” what.

Best,

Boris