| David's argument is tantamount to stating that it is categorically
| impossible for some small stimulus often repeated to avoid or defuse
| some very large effect, This is so open to counter-example
| that I will not
| need to list such out of scale cause and effect scenarios.
I don't understand the objections, I don't think David B. was saying
that bunches of small effects can't be equivalent to one large effect.
His objection, as I understood it, was merely being sceptical of the
number of small effects that were said to be equivalent of the big
effect in question.
| (Big shot professors don't get to be big shot professors by
| stating the obvious,
| far less by proposing the ridiculous, I take it? :-)
|
|
In my experience, one can go a far way towards appearing to be an expert
by stating the obvious. As the obvious often is so obvious to many
people; and even to the one's for whom its obvious, it tends to validate
their opinion which helps to inculcate the opinion that the speaker was
an expert.
Happy New Year everyone; the "oughts" are now more than half over.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l