From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 11/09/00-03:51:20 PM Z
On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Katharine Thayer wrote:
>
> P.S. to respond quickly to the last point in Wayde's most recent post,
> which came in just as I was about to click the send button: I am all for
> repeatability. What I've been trying to say over and over again is that
> your idea that repeatability can be achieved by the methods described in
> the references you gave is, in my experience, a misplaced faith.
And perhaps not necessary.... But how you define "repeatability"?
Is "repeatability" every time without exception, all results cancelled if
anomaly occurs? And HOW exact is "repeatable" anyway ? Pretty close?
Similar? Or weigh it on the fingerprint scale (in which case I'm out of
the game)? My timer is a gralab, not rocket science level. My water is
available temp from the faucet. My breath may change hourly. BUT I haven't
found these general conditions rule out other problem solving... which
suggests another proposition: I'll try to figure this out with my usual
keen insight, dedicated artistry and general kvetching, under prevailing
conditions of restrained chaos (which I haven't yet managed to clean up --
that's first step for the clean room).
First I'll try to get the discoloration again, because most of my tests
*don't* have it, tho that may take 6 months -- minimum.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/01/00-11:46:56 AM Z CST