| |
Main
Date: 17 Jun 2007 16:35:57
From: ronaldo_jeremiah
Subject: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
A recent post by Tom Kunich (TK) clearly illustrates the need for
corrected estimates of post content by author. Specifically, TK
claimed to have been able to use a three-stage process to spin up a
53x15 gear to a cadence of 180 rpm (it is assumed that wheel size was
700c, though this is not specified). This equates to about 50 mph,
superior to the finest slightly-downhill sprint that Mario Cipollini
could produce in his heyday. For TK, this is par for the course (the
boast, not the actual achievement of claimed performance). After
illustrating the impossibility of the claim, r.b.r. veteran Carl
Sundquist showed fine skills, honed by voluminous TK experience, to
deduce that this realistically reduces to an actual performance of 120
rpm on the same gear, equivalent to a speed of 32 mph that one could
expect of a Cat 5 performance. (The alternate explanation, that TK
was using 469c wheels, seems much less likely, but cannot be entirely
ruled out). Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
KK = 120/180 = 67%.
This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
Thankfully, a vast backlog of data does exist.
The principles of KK can be extended to qualitative posts, though
judgment and experience are required. For example a TK post claiming
"I was a sharpshooter"
should be conservatively KK'ed to
"I have shot guns a few times"
or even liberally KK'ed to
"I have been in the same room as a gun, once."
Discussion:
Kunich Korrection (KK) is a powerful tool for extracting sense from
the hyperbole of TK posts. It assumes that there is always kernel of
truth in a TK post that can be estimated by careful discounting. KK =
67% is suggested as a good starting point for most quantitative posts,
though lower values may demonstrate their superiority as the technique
is refined. The principles of KK have been used by r.b.r. veterans
for years. The elucidation and naming of the technique, along with
the provision of worked examples, is hoped to benefit r.b.r.
journeymen and provide a shorthand that will streamline posts
exhibiting TK-associated deviations from rationality.
-rj
|
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 23:12:09
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 9:21 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1182221559.642487.161280@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jun 18, 5:21 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1182210555.647160.100840@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT
>
> >> > Eleven degrees of lattitude.
>
> >> Ahem, so you're telling us that 79 Degrees north has NEVER been ice free?
> >> Maybe you ought to tell that to the people of Spitzbergen.
>
> > And you wonder why I can't stand you.
>
> Not at all. Ever since you first came here you've been adverse to the truth.
This truth?
On Feb 10, 4:48 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote in
response to Robert Chung:
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nospl...
>
> "This week, I'll show how the UN undervalued the sun's effects on historical
> and contemporary climate, slashed the natural greenhouse effect, overstated
> the past century's temperature increase, repealed a fundamental law of
> physics and tripled the man-made greenhouse effect."
>
> "Scores of scientific papers show that the medieval warm period was real,
> global and up to 3C warmer than now. Then, there were no glaciers in the
> tropical Andes: today they're there. There were Viking farms in Greenland:
> now they're under permafrost. There was little ice at theNorthPole: a
> Chinese naval squadron sailed right round the Arctic in 1421 and found
> none."
>
> Though I'm quite sure that you're a lot more educated about these things.
|
| |
Date: 19 Jun 2007 04:09:47
From: amit.ghosh@gmail.com
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 7:16 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote in message
>
> news:1182206414.301421.218550@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > It seems unlikely that Polo actually used a magnetic
> > compass for navigation or introduced it to Europe.
> > The Chinese had invented it by then but references to
> > its use for navigation postdate Marco Polo. Kunich,
> > perhaps you could point out where Polo mentions a
> > compass in his works:
> > http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/p#a3613
>
> Since you don't remember the conversation let's go back over it. Originally
> I confused two books and said Marco Polo instead of Zheng He (I think). But
> you knuckleheads can only remember the mistake and not the corrections.
dumbass,
to admit that you were confused and wrong is something i didn't think
i'd ever see,
let us recognize this thread for the watershed moment that it is.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jun 2007 10:17:36
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
amit.ghosh@gmail.com wrote:
> to admit that you were confused and wrong is something i didn't think
> i'd ever see,
>
> let us recognize this thread for the watershed moment that it is.
The kusp in Kunich Katastrophe theory.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 19:52:39
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 5:21 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1182210555.647160.100840@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT
>
> > Eleven degrees of lattitude.
>
> Ahem, so you're telling us that 79 Degrees north has NEVER been ice free?
> Maybe you ought to tell that to the people of Spitzbergen.
Jackass -
And you wonder why I can't stand you.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jun 2007 04:21:54
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1182221559.642487.161280@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 18, 5:21 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1182210555.647160.100840@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT
>>
>> > Eleven degrees of lattitude.
>>
>> Ahem, so you're telling us that 79 Degrees north has NEVER been ice free?
>> Maybe you ought to tell that to the people of Spitzbergen.
>
> And you wonder why I can't stand you.
Not at all. Ever since you first came here you've been adverse to the truth.
Smart assing away your life on an inheritance seems to have turned you from
a possible winner to a last place loser dedicated to proving that last is
best.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 18:53:40
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> > > > suppose that meant?
>
> > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>
> > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
> > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>
> Jackass -
>
> Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
> degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
11 deg? Where?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_North_Pole
The direction in which a compass needle points is known as magnetic
north. In general, this is not exactly the direction of the North
Magnetic Pole (or of any other consistent location). Instead, the
compass aligns itself to the local geomagnetic field, which varies in
a complex manner over the Earth's surface, as well as over time.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 16:49:15
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> > > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> > > > > suppose that meant?
>
> > > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> > > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>
> > > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
> > > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>
> > Jackass -
>
> > Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
> > degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
>
> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT
Dumbass -
Eleven degrees of lattitude.
The reason for the variation is that the magnetic field of our
particular planet is caused by the molten iron core at the center.
Since it is molten it doesn't move in lockstep with the 'solid' outer
plates although the core is affected by them. You should just read the
nasa.gov sites I referred you to on the subject instead of playing
stupid.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jun 2007 00:21:17
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1182210555.647160.100840@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT
>
> Eleven degrees of lattitude.
Ahem, so you're telling us that 79 Degrees north has NEVER been ice free?
Maybe you ought to tell that to the people of Spitzbergen.
> The reason for the variation is that the magnetic field of our
> particular planet is caused by the molten iron core at the center.
> Since it is molten it doesn't move in lockstep with the 'solid' outer
> plates although the core is affected by them. You should just read the
> nasa.gov sites I referred you to on the subject instead of playing
> stupid.
How nice of you to be an expert at something that has never been
satisfactorily explained by science.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 22:40:14
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 2:51 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> <cyclin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what
> >> > > > do you
> >> > > > suppose that meant?
>
> >> > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> >> > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
Henry, stop confusing the issue by attempting to
argue with Kunich's whackjob theory on the merits
of the case.
It seems unlikely that Polo actually used a magnetic
compass for navigation or introduced it to Europe.
The Chinese had invented it by then but references to
its use for navigation postdate Marco Polo. Kunich,
perhaps you could point out where Polo mentions a
compass in his works:
http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/p#a3613
> >> > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
> >> > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>
> >> Jackass -
>
> >> Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
> >> degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
> > Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT?
> Are you really dumb, or do you just play one on the usenet?
No, no, Kunich has a point. Did the pole and the pole
differ by 11 degrees Fahrenheit or Celsius? There's a big
difference. Are we talking about the Medieval Warm Period
or the Medieval 110-in-the-Shade-in-Minsk Period?
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 23:16:34
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org > wrote in message
news:1182206414.301421.218550@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> It seems unlikely that Polo actually used a magnetic
> compass for navigation or introduced it to Europe.
> The Chinese had invented it by then but references to
> its use for navigation postdate Marco Polo. Kunich,
> perhaps you could point out where Polo mentions a
> compass in his works:
> http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/p#a3613
Since you don't remember the conversation let's go back over it. Originally
I confused two books and said Marco Polo instead of Zheng He (I think). But
you knuckleheads can only remember the mistake and not the corrections. But
that's all well and fine since you don't have any problem arguing that it
was never possible to get between the north pole and the magnetic north pole
and not find ice.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 14:14:44
From:
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> > > > suppose that meant?
>
> > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>
> > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
> > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>
> Jackass -
>
> Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
> degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT?
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 18:44:23
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:14:44 -0700, cyclintom@gmail.com wrote:
>On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
>> > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
>> > > > suppose that meant?
>>
>> > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
>> > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>>
>> > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
>> > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>>
>> Jackass -
>>
>> Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
>> degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
>
>Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT?
Kevin Bacon.
Ron
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 14:51:51
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
<cyclintom@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1182201284.263742.224930@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 18, 9:52 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly
>> > > > the
>> > > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what
>> > > > do you
>> > > > suppose that meant?
>>
>> > > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
>> > > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>>
>> > Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
>> > could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
>>
>> Jackass -
>>
>> Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
>> degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
>
> Ahem, 11 degrees of WHAT?
Are you really dumb, or do you just play one on the usenet?
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 09:52:49
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 18, 7:02 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> > > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> > > suppose that meant?
>
> > As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> > rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
>
> Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
> could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
Jackass -
Right now the magnetic pole and the axis of rotation differ by eleven
degrees but in the past it's been much greater.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 07:02:15
From:
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 9:09 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> > opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> > suppose that meant?
>
> As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
> rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
Now if you only had the ability to think beside read, perhaps one
could augment the other. But that's probably a dream in your case.
|
| |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 05:16:36
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 9:35 am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>
> It assumes that there is always kernel of
> truth in a TK post that can be estimated by careful discounting.
Utter crackpottery! I can't believe this made it past
the new RBR peer review system. The journals will
publish anything these days.
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 12:28:10
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
bjw@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> Utter crackpottery! I can't believe this made it past
> the new RBR peer review system. The journals will
> publish anything these days.
The rbr peer review board received a free case of 15% beer with the paper
and considered the paper quite credible when compared to their RAAM
inspired hallucinations.
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 07:22:55
From: Fred Fredburger
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
Donald Munro wrote:
> bjw@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
>> Utter crackpottery! I can't believe this made it past
>> the new RBR peer review system. The journals will
>> publish anything these days.
>
> The rbr peer review board received a free case of 15% beer with the paper
> and considered the paper quite credible when compared to their RAAM
> inspired hallucinations.
>
Oh sure, blame RAAM for our normal background of hallucinations. Not
like we typically need much "inspiration" there.
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 21:09:25
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 7:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> "Bret" <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1182117368.011090.35450@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > I like it. You can also apply it to TK's statements about others. If
> > Marco Polo sailed 67% of the way to the North Pole, that would put him
> > at 60 degrees or in the Bering Sea. Much more believable.
>
> So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> suppose that meant?
Jackass -
As always, you're a goddamm idiot. The magnetic pole and the axis of
rotation of the earth are not one and the same.
From:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/29dec_magneticfield.htm
<snip >
Scientists have long known that the magnetic pole moves. James Ross
located the pole for the first time in 1831 after an exhausting arctic
journey during which his ship got stuck in the ice for four years. No
one returned until the next century. In 1904, Roald Amundsen found the
pole again and discovered that it had moved--at least 50 km since the
days of Ross.
The pole kept going during the 20th century, north at an average speed
of 10 km per year, lately accelerating "to 40 km per year," says
Newitt. At this rate it will exit North America and reach Siberia in a
few decades.
Keeping track of the north magnetic pole is Newitt's job. "We usually
go out and check its location once every few years," he says. "We'll
have to make more trips now that it is moving so quickly."
Earth's magnetic field is changing in other ways, too: Compass needles
in Africa, for instance, are drifting about 1 degree per decade. And
globally the magnetic field has weakened 10% since the 19th century.
When this was mentioned by researchers at a recent meeting of the
American Geophysical Union, many newspapers carried the story. A
typical headline: "Is Earth's magnetic field collapsing?"
Probably not. As remarkable as these changes sound, "they're mild
compared to what Earth's magnetic field has done in the past," says
University of California professor Gary Glatzmaier.
<snip ><end>
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 19:16:11
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 10:02 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> "Bret" <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > I like it. You can also apply it to TK's statements about others. If
> > Marco Polo sailed 67% of the way to the North Pole, that would put him
> > at 60 degrees or in the Bering Sea. Much more believable.
>
> So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
> opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
> suppose that meant?
Broken compass and a cheap hotel?
R
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 21:56:08
From: Bret
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 10:35 am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> A recent post by Tom Kunich (TK) clearly illustrates the need for
> corrected estimates of post content by author. Specifically, TK
> claimed to have been able to use a three-stage process to spin up a
> 53x15 gear to a cadence of 180 rpm (it is assumed that wheel size was
> 700c, though this is not specified). This equates to about 50 mph,
> superior to the finest slightly-downhill sprint that Mario Cipollini
> could produce in his heyday. For TK, this is par for the course (the
> boast, not the actual achievement of claimed performance). After
> illustrating the impossibility of the claim, r.b.r. veteran Carl
> Sundquist showed fine skills, honed by voluminous TK experience, to
> deduce that this realistically reduces to an actual performance of 120
> rpm on the same gear, equivalent to a speed of 32 mph that one could
> expect of a Cat 5 performance. (The alternate explanation, that TK
> was using 469c wheels, seems much less likely, but cannot be entirely
> ruled out). Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
> applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
>
> KK = 120/180 = 67%.
>
> This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
> represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
> using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
> appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
> Thankfully, a vast backlog of data does exist.
>
> The principles of KK can be extended to qualitative posts, though
> judgment and experience are required. For example a TK post claiming
>
> "I was a sharpshooter"
>
> should be conservatively KK'ed to
>
> "I have shot guns a few times"
>
> or even liberally KK'ed to
>
> "I have been in the same room as a gun, once."
>
> Discussion:
> Kunich Korrection (KK) is a powerful tool for extracting sense from
> the hyperbole of TK posts. It assumes that there is always kernel of
> truth in a TK post that can be estimated by careful discounting. KK =
> 67% is suggested as a good starting point for most quantitative posts,
> though lower values may demonstrate their superiority as the technique
> is refined. The principles of KK have been used by r.b.r. veterans
> for years. The elucidation and naming of the technique, along with
> the provision of worked examples, is hoped to benefit r.b.r.
> journeymen and provide a shorthand that will streamline posts
> exhibiting TK-associated deviations from rationality.
>
> -rj
I like it. You can also apply it to TK's statements about others. If
Marco Polo sailed 67% of the way to the North Pole, that would put him
at 60 degrees or in the Bering Sea. Much more believable.
Bret
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 22:22:48
From: Stu Fleming
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
Bret wrote:
> I like it. You can also apply it to TK's statements about others. If
> Marco Polo sailed 67% of the way to the North Pole, that would put him
> at 60 degrees or in the Bering Sea. Much more believable.
Isn't the North Pole named after the guy who discovered it?
Pole..Polo?
Seems conclusive to me.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 02:02:38
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
"Bret" <bret.wade@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1182117368.011090.35450@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> I like it. You can also apply it to TK's statements about others. If
> Marco Polo sailed 67% of the way to the North Pole, that would put him
> at 60 degrees or in the Bering Sea. Much more believable.
So tell me - when he reported that the north star bore in exactly the
opposite direction of the compass and that there was no ice - what do you
suppose that meant?
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 12:17:45
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 2:58 pm, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> > Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
> > applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
>
> > KK = 120/180 = 67%.
>
> > This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
> > represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
> > using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
> > appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
>
> Perhaps you need to add some Katastrophe theory to improve the
> approximation.
I believe you meant to write KAOS theory.
I hadn't noticed the resemblence, but it's unmistakable.
http://www.berniekopell.com/photos/4.html
http://www.kenpapai.com/cycling/rbr/Tomk.JPG
R
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 20:58:32
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
> applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
>
> KK = 120/180 = 67%.
>
> This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
> represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
> using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
> appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
Perhaps you need to add some Katastrophe theory to improve the
approximation.
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 17:42:14
From: ronaldo_jeremiah
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 12:34 pm, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com > wrote:
>
> A yeoman-like workup, but without graphs, plotted data, footnotes and
> a comprehensive bibliography you'll never get it published.
It's more a of think piece. And it's already published.
Now, pardon me while I update my vita.
-rj
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 22:23:34
From: Stu Fleming
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> It's more a of think piece. And it's already published.
But did it make the cover...?
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2007 10:34:11
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
On Jun 17, 12:35 pm, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> A recent post by Tom Kunich (TK) clearly illustrates the need for
> corrected estimates of post content by author. Specifically, TK
> claimed to have been able to use a three-stage process to spin up a
> 53x15 gear to a cadence of 180 rpm (it is assumed that wheel size was
> 700c, though this is not specified). This equates to about 50 mph,
> superior to the finest slightly-downhill sprint that Mario Cipollini
> could produce in his heyday. For TK, this is par for the course (the
> boast, not the actual achievement of claimed performance). After
> illustrating the impossibility of the claim, r.b.r. veteran Carl
> Sundquist showed fine skills, honed by voluminous TK experience, to
> deduce that this realistically reduces to an actual performance of 120
> rpm on the same gear, equivalent to a speed of 32 mph that one could
> expect of a Cat 5 performance. (The alternate explanation, that TK
> was using 469c wheels, seems much less likely, but cannot be entirely
> ruled out). Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
> applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
>
> KK = 120/180 = 67%.
>
> This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
> represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
> using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
> appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
> Thankfully, a vast backlog of data does exist.
>
> The principles of KK can be extended to qualitative posts, though
> judgment and experience are required. For example a TK post claiming
>
> "I was a sharpshooter"
>
> should be conservatively KK'ed to
>
> "I have shot guns a few times"
>
> or even liberally KK'ed to
>
> "I have been in the same room as a gun, once."
>
> Discussion:
> Kunich Korrection (KK) is a powerful tool for extracting sense from
> the hyperbole of TK posts. It assumes that there is always kernel of
> truth in a TK post that can be estimated by careful discounting. KK =
> 67% is suggested as a good starting point for most quantitative posts,
> though lower values may demonstrate their superiority as the technique
> is refined. The principles of KK have been used by r.b.r. veterans
> for years. The elucidation and naming of the technique, along with
> the provision of worked examples, is hoped to benefit r.b.r.
> journeymen and provide a shorthand that will streamline posts
> exhibiting TK-associated deviations from rationality.
A yeoman-like workup, but without graphs, plotted data, footnotes and
a comprehensive bibliography you'll never get it published. Don't
worry about the bibliography - no one actually reads all of the books
they list and no one will check your sources.
R
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2007 00:10:31
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: The Kunich Korrection: A required skill for r.b.r. navigation
|
In article
<1182101651.356527.326890@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com >
,
RicodJour <ricodjour@worldemail.com > wrote:
> On Jun 17, 12:35 pm, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > A recent post by Tom Kunich (TK) clearly illustrates the need for
> > corrected estimates of post content by author. Specifically, TK
> > claimed to have been able to use a three-stage process to spin up a
> > 53x15 gear to a cadence of 180 rpm (it is assumed that wheel size was
> > 700c, though this is not specified). This equates to about 50 mph,
> > superior to the finest slightly-downhill sprint that Mario Cipollini
> > could produce in his heyday. For TK, this is par for the course (the
> > boast, not the actual achievement of claimed performance). After
> > illustrating the impossibility of the claim, r.b.r. veteran Carl
> > Sundquist showed fine skills, honed by voluminous TK experience, to
> > deduce that this realistically reduces to an actual performance of 120
> > rpm on the same gear, equivalent to a speed of 32 mph that one could
> > expect of a Cat 5 performance. (The alternate explanation, that TK
> > was using 469c wheels, seems much less likely, but cannot be entirely
> > ruled out). Though Carl did not label it as such, he has masterfully
> > applied the Kunich Korrection (KK). In this case:
> >
> > KK = 120/180 = 67%.
> >
> > This is a good starting value for quantitative TK posts, though it may
> > represent an upper bound. When given results are still implausible
> > using KK = 67%, KK's equivalent to 50%, 33%, or even 8% may be
> > appropriate. Further refinement of quantitative KK is necessary.
> > Thankfully, a vast backlog of data does exist.
> >
> > The principles of KK can be extended to qualitative posts, though
> > judgment and experience are required. For example a TK post claiming
> >
> > "I was a sharpshooter"
> >
> > should be conservatively KK'ed to
> >
> > "I have shot guns a few times"
> >
> > or even liberally KK'ed to
> >
> > "I have been in the same room as a gun, once."
> >
> > Discussion:
> > Kunich Korrection (KK) is a powerful tool for extracting sense from
> > the hyperbole of TK posts. It assumes that there is always kernel of
> > truth in a TK post that can be estimated by careful discounting. KK =
> > 67% is suggested as a good starting point for most quantitative posts,
> > though lower values may demonstrate their superiority as the technique
> > is refined. The principles of KK have been used by r.b.r. veterans
> > for years. The elucidation and naming of the technique, along with
> > the provision of worked examples, is hoped to benefit r.b.r.
> > journeymen and provide a shorthand that will streamline posts
> > exhibiting TK-associated deviations from rationality.
>
> A yeoman-like workup, but without graphs, plotted data, footnotes and
> a comprehensive bibliography you'll never get it published. Don't
> worry about the bibliography - no one actually reads all of the books
> they list and no one will check your sources.
Then we can apply a TK correction to all published
bibliographies. Sometimes I wonder if authors have read
their own cited works.
--
Michael Press
|
|
