>>> John Boone on Biofuzz 
 
 WE> Deviation of the data set could be all HRi - HRj for all 
 WE> pairs of i,j (ij) that make the difference non-negative. 
 JB> Ah, not sure such (limiting said differences to being 
 JB> non-negative unless you allow (i,j) to be transposed to 
 JB> arrange for being not negative,  but this could be simply 
 JB> arranged by appling absolute value, |60 - 120| = 60. 
Ok, |HRi - HRj| for all i  j.
 WE> JB> Oscillation within a plane (x,y).  The plot (x,y) is the 
 WE> JB> path of the pendulum, the thing at the end of the string.  
 WE> JB> If the pendulum swings with frequency, sf, whose pivot point  
 WE> JB> moves along a line -segment- with frequency, hf, the pendulum's  
 WE> JB> path at certain hf become chaotic.   
--- 
 WE> Hm, if sf = hf then we'd have zero spread?   
 JB> Not sure, I have not written the differential equations. 
 JB> However, my initial response would be no.  Reason, hf the 
 JB> time, depicts a is linear path, sf the time, is the time 
 JB> the pendulum moves in an -ARC-.  
Use the horizontal projection of the pendulum motion.  Frequency is the same. 
 JB> My source for such an example came from Paul Davies and 
 JB> David Gribbons in the "Matter Myth."  Of interesting note, 
 JB> Paul Davies and David Gribbons makes the distinction between 
 JB> -DETERMINISTIC- and -PREDICTIABILITY-.  Pointing out, such 
 JB> a system is -deterministic- but in some cases -NOT- 
 JB> predictable.  Interesting, no. 
Determined by the theoretics of mathematics.  Unpredictable by the human lack 
of mathematical precise measurements of the initial starting position.
 JB> IMO, they are; as, they show the so called "butterfly effect" 
 JB> often evoked to justify global warming may in fact be bounded. 
 JB> Those who use the "butterfly" effect, "small effects" to "hugh 
 JB> effects" to justify global warming, -appear- to miss the fact chaos 
 JB> is often bounded. 
The butterfly effect is wishful thinking by impotent New Age being for an 
omnipotent handle upon the universe.  It will go into effect as soon as I can 
get a hundred monkeys to endorse it. -) (100 monkey effect)
 
 WE> Now as you vary hf how does the spread change? 
 JB> Not, sure, I haven't spent the time to write the differential 
 JB> equations. 
Hm, how about a computer simulation or even a model?
Actually the physics isn't simple as the movement of the pivot will impart 
momentum to the pendulum,  I'd imagine that at certain frequencies the 
pendulum could get quite a swing going.
 WE> Well let's see.  What's your opinion on alternative medicine? 
 JB> Hmmm, not sure. How is that for an answer ?  
That since 100 monkeys have used it, all us monkeys is gonna to use it? -)
I will make 
 JB> the comment that some "alternative" medicines include compounds 
 JB> found in modern medicine, e.g. pseudoephedrine.  In addition, 
 JB> not sure -how- one "blinds" such endeavors from the patient 
 JB> and provider to determine benefit from a scientific standpoint? 
Valium and valerian root, digitalis and fox glove,
 WE> Any comments about the medical system or delivery of services? 
 JB> I think the introduction of insurance and government is wrong. 
You have an alternative for medicare?  What's weird is the linking of health 
insurance to employer.  What do you think?  HMOs?  My experience with mother 
is that she'd get little service from an HMO, Hellish Mean Ordeal, if I 
didn't jump her thru all of those hoops.  As it was she was a day immobile 
for lack of a wheelchair 'cause they went by the cussed book.
 JB> IMO, what counts is the relationship between the patient and 
 JB> physician without outside influences including pecuniary ones.   
Gosh, that would cut down on a doctors productivity as patient relationships 
take time to build. 
... Does junk science rust?  No it tarnishes.  It tarnishes reputations.
---
---------------