[MD] Heads or tails?

[Kevin Perez]

Hello Ron,
 
> It all Depends on the "values" of "x" in realtion to an assumed limit...It's all variable,
> the closest we can get to Precision is an assumed limit with an assumed "mean"
> and that depends on the value of the measurement In relation to the intent of the
> subject with the object.
 
Yes.  I mentioned the function that rounds to the nearest whole number because I
remembered you said you and your daughter had seen this play out on a calculator.
And I mentioned this because it is something altogether different from the problems
of precision and measurement.  Setting a machine to filter its output is different from
being able to repeat and reproduce the same input to the machine (e.g., measuring
device).
 
On the other hand precision and measurement are functions of variation in what's
being measured and in the measuring process.  In my line of work the latter is taken
to include both the human element and the measuring device.  The same gauge used
by different people and producing the same result is called reproducibility.  And the
same gauge used by the same person and producing the same result is called
repeatability.  Gauge R & R and elements of the manufacturing process combine
to provide the means to ensure that what is delivered to the customer is what the
customer is told it can expect.
 
I suppose the philosophical implications of precision and measurement would be
knowledge and truth.  For example, when the area of a building site is communicated
to a potential buyer is the buyer told they're being offered some area ± some variance
due to measuring process variations?  Probably not because the variance is so small.
What if they weren't?  Imagine property law if the best a surveyor could do is measure
to ± 10 feet.  Every property would be bounded by zones of contention.
 
> The emphisis I'm making is that ƒ is not an absolute value ...that the value [(x) + (x)]
> is the The "real" value and not absolute. Only when a limit to perception/precision is
> applied is anything Useable and senseable. I'm seeing paralells to Bohrs philosophy.
> Is [(x) + (x)] the function Of Quality?
 
Right.  It seems like or feels like discerning what's real is a matter of perception that
includes a degree of uncertainty.  Is that building site 100,000 or 100,000.0069 square
feet?  If the area is measured 3 times and 3 different results are obtained should the
variance be attributed to the measuring device, the measuring process or to plate
tectonics?  And what is the significance of 1 square inch to a 2.3 acre building site?
 
The quality of the area measurement, it seems to me, is probably more a matter of
using a calibrated measuring device correctly and reporting the results accurately and
quickly than anything else.
 

Kevin

       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.