Surely Dr. Dick is doing "perspective analysis"?

Does anyone see the connection between his paper, Schrodinger's equation; and the quote about the task of definition?:

From John Hospers' "An Introduction To Philosophical Analysis": chapter on Meaning and Definition:

"The problem is to get all the defining characteristics into the definition, but none that are not defining."

"In other words a definition must be adequate to the possible as well as the actual cases. We want to know what are the characteristics, the presence of which would entitle something to be called an elephant and the absence of which would keep it from being called one. To know this, we must go beyond the range of the actual things to which the word is applied."

("...adequate to the possible..." adding unknown data? as in Dr. Dick's paper?)
("beyond the range" Dr. Dick's "property-less events? unknown data? )

"The practical test in fact, when we wish to know whether any proposed definition is a true one or not, is to try whether by any conceivable variation of circumstances we can cause it to break down, by its exclusion of what we are resolved to retain, or its inclusion of what we are resolved to reject".

(..whether by "any conceivable circumstances"...looks like Schrodinger's "any conceivable alternative way..")

("Exclusion...inclusion...." partial differentiation?)

("..whether any proposed definition a true one or not..." ...Dr. Dick's puzzle? )

-dolphin