[109487] in Cypherpunks
Re: CDR: Re: About Alpha radiation... (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Choate)
Thu Mar 25 19:03:25 1999
From: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:48:40 -0600 (CST)
Reply-To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
----- Forwarded message from Lucky Green -----
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 00:36:15 +0100 (CET)
From: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: About Alpha radiation... (fwd)
I wasn't referring to long-term charge storage. Sigh. I guess my post did
not do much good, since the first reply to it totally ingored the main
thrust in it, namely that statements about phenomena not truly understood
by an author are often wrong and that textbook explanations are frequenly
simplified and thus may not suffice in analyzing non-standard scenarios.
One would have hoped the reader to pause for a moment before attacking
an example specifically chosen for its complexity and marked as such.
----- End of forwarded message from Lucky Green -----
Then you should be more careful about the way you word your statements.
One could say that since your original statement was incomplete and left out
important boundary conditions would imply you didn't understand it any
better than the original poster or the textbook authors.
The reader would hope the examples were complete and clearly deliniated
their boundary conditions so the reader was better able to understand the
limitations themselves and apply them more effectively.
____________________________________________________________________
The trouble with acting according to your conscience is that
once you start doing it, nobody can trust you any more.
Alexis A. Gilliland
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
