🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Sat, Dec 13, 2003 10:03 PM UTC:
Tony P.,
You wrote: 'In one of 12-12 comments ('As it turns out, the dictionary
...') you brought up statistics and suggested that a different meaning
('specialized sense') was being given to orthogonal by statisticians. I
responded by indicating that these statistical senses were not different
in their root meaning. You criticized this as involving equations between
sets of coordinates rather than geometry.'
Okay, here is why your comments puzzled me. You are entirely mistaken in
your assumption that my comments on equations had anything at all to do
with your comments on the statistical use of orthogonal. In fact, I have
said nothing on the subject of the statistical use of orthogonal since my
one-time mention of it. My comments on equations between sets of
coordinates was on an entirely unrelated thread, in which I was simply
discussing the two different methods for describing piece movement.
Tony P., You wrote: 'In one of 12-12 comments ('As it turns out, the dictionary ...') you brought up statistics and suggested that a different meaning ('specialized sense') was being given to orthogonal by statisticians. I responded by indicating that these statistical senses were not different in their root meaning. You criticized this as involving equations between sets of coordinates rather than geometry.' Okay, here is why your comments puzzled me. You are entirely mistaken in your assumption that my comments on equations had anything at all to do with your comments on the statistical use of orthogonal. In fact, I have said nothing on the subject of the statistical use of orthogonal since my one-time mention of it. My comments on equations between sets of coordinates was on an entirely unrelated thread, in which I was simply discussing the two different methods for describing piece movement.