Re: hypothesis violation (was Re: [Heartlogic-dev] tentative plan)

[William L. Jarrold]

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 01:50 -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > See espec
> > dicussion section of chapter about study 3.  also conclusion chapter,
> > maybe also disucssion section of chapter about study 2.  think about
> > how to use a flowchart to answer some of the explanations of those
> > items
> > that did not live up to hypothesis
>
> I re-read those parts just now.  The discussion of comments is mostly
> confined to study #2.  What I found in study #3 is a lot of discussion
> of the fine points of the statistics and associated guesswork about
> the cause of the inconsistent results.
>
> I did not find a proposal for the kind of flow-chart study which I
> want to do.

right.  i did not expect you to.  but methinks that some of the
associated guesswork could be answered with a flowchart like study.
worst case, i'll dust off the diss and re-read my guesswork and then
showya what i mean by using flowschart study.

but first, b4 walking, i must crawl and do the $)(*(*&! replication. stay 
tuned.

bill

> --
> If you are an American then support http://fairtax.org
> (Permanently replace 50,000+ pages of tax law with about 200 pages.)