hello Dr. Dick,

perhaps the following will clear up the point that we are discussing.

sir a quote from your paper follows:
"This examination referred to is defined to be the information available to our senses (the alternate view of our senses as expressed in figure 2). These subsets of reality (sets of numbers) are transformed (by our senses) into the information available for us to analyze (after we have constructed our mental model of reality)."

it was from the above quote that i came up with my original statement below:
this set of numbers can be divided into subsets. those subsets can be construed as transformed by our senses for analysis via the fundamental transform of the model we construct.

in my statement i'm assumming that the way you meant the subset of numbers would be analyzed (after being filtered by our senses) would be via the fundamental transform of the model that you are creating.

i realize my second (revised) statement below was way off:
the data of reality as it impinges upon our senses is collected first through the filter of our senses and then we feed that filtered data through the fundamental transform (of fig 2) which yields the divided subset of numbers.
so scratch that one i'm back to my orignial statement.

it may not appear so, but i'm really with you on this issue of the senses. the part i'm not sure we are together on is that once we have the subset of numbers how are we analyzing them, with the fundamental transform, or what our human logic, mathematics...

as a side note, my dad also bemoaned the advent of modern schools and the vanishing one room schools.

regards, tim

• Check my comment to Yanniru. - doctordick - June 3, 2003 - 02:43 UTC
  • Ahh... the good ole' days - harvey1 - June 3, 2003 - 03:39 UTC
    • ohh those days have drifted away.... - sagefr0g - June 3, 2003 - 09:38 UTC