EPO and Hobby Cyclists

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Fred, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. Kyle Legate <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Howard,


    > While your points are all correct based on careful, distanced analysis of
    > the available FACTS, you'll never get through to a guy who thinks that all
    > terrorism is caused by a girl's ass crack.


    Our problem is that Western society's corruptive influence isn't
    corrosive enough. Several of the Sept 11th plotters were in the
    U.S. for months before the attacks, occassionally making forays
    into Florida bars (IIRC). If only one of them had been corrupted
    enough to think "Hey, I'm not sure I want to die for a holy cause.
    I want to spend some more time here drinking Bud Light and checking
    out girls' asses," the whole tragedy might have been averted.

    I'd still like to see the entire cast of "Friends" launched on
    a rocket into the sun, though, but not for foreign policy reasons.
     


  2. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "gwhite" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Tom Kunich" wrote:
    > >
    > > Greg, I finally came to the conclusion yesterday that what these people

    are
    > > doing is trying to pretend that THEY have no responsibility for the
    > > terrorism in the world.

    >
    > Well I certainly don't feel responsible *for* it. The complaints
    > about things like US trade policy and culture "stomping" as provoking
    > terrorism are utterly ridiculous. I do feel responsible to do
    > something *about* terrorism.


    that's because the "responsibility" is so diaphanous. We believe in live and
    let live. We allow "adult book stores" to be opened three doors down from
    grade schools and we essentially do nothing about kiddy porn and roadside
    bill boards about feminine hygene products all of which are so disturbing to
    most of the rest of the world that we don't even have a good idea of just
    how outraged they really are.

    I worked with very educated people from all over the globe and in many cases
    when prompted they have spoken of humiliation when turning on the TV, radio
    or even opening a newspaper. Although they will say that they prefer the
    freedom of this country, when they go back to their own countries they don't
    talk about Standard Oil buying crude from Saudi sheiks, but about "Friends"
    (well, actually soap operas but you know what I mean) coming through on the
    satellite link to every home. In second world countries they all want to
    have the luxuries and comforts that we Americans have but their religious
    leaders see the moral corruption much more than the Escalades.

    You don't feel responsible but you are. As am I. One of the differences here
    is that I have accepted that responsibility. I have considered what we could
    do and have come to the conclusion that we have been doing about as good a
    job on the overall picture as we could. No one could predict Ayatollah
    Komeni and in fact the Shah was a MUCH kinder and gentler governor than the
    Ayatohlahs but a substantial margin. To suggest that our support of Shah
    Pavlevi was wrong was to completely ignore Iran's history before and after
    the Shah. In fact, what brought him down wasn't his somewhat free-handed
    secret service who were butchers on the occassion, but that he was
    attempting to install a government free from religious affiliations.

    > We are probably in agreement that an effete (appeasement) policy is
    > one doomed for long term disaster, death, and chaos. For the purpose
    > of winning, it doesn't work any better with one's enemies than it does
    > in a bike race. Basically we get in their face and take them out.
    > That would be my approach.


    I think that we have no choice. It really is "us'ns or them".
     
  3. Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Benjamin Weiner wrote:
    > > (There are statistical methods which try to make sure
    > > you get the same answer for fitting y against x or x against y.)


    > Which are those, and why would one be interested in that particular
    > criterion?


    Well, you never know, Greg might be your paper's referee.

    There's potentially hundreds of ways of fitting a straight line
    to a set of points. I have some references cribbed from a grad
    student if you care (but you probably know them already).
    Amazingly, there is a controversy in my field right now which is
    partly because people are arguing about these methods
    (Tremaine et al 2003 Astrophys J 574, 740). If you care about
    the values of the underlying relation, then a couple of nice
    properties are invariance under changes in scale of x or y and
    exchange of x and y; not all methods do this. Me, I just act
    dumb and use the routine from Numerical Recipes.
     
  4. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    Benjamin Weiner wrote:
    > Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Benjamin Weiner wrote:
    >>> (There are statistical methods which try to make sure
    >>> you get the same answer for fitting y against x or x against y.)

    >
    >> Which are those, and why would one be interested in that particular
    >> criterion?

    >
    > Well, you never know, Greg might be your paper's referee.
    >
    > There's potentially hundreds of ways of fitting a straight line
    > to a set of points. I have some references cribbed from a grad
    > student if you care (but you probably know them already).
    > Amazingly, there is a controversy in my field right now which is
    > partly because people are arguing about these methods
    > (Tremaine et al 2003 Astrophys J 574, 740). If you care about
    > the values of the underlying relation, then a couple of nice
    > properties are invariance under changes in scale of x or y and
    > exchange of x and y; not all methods do this. Me, I just act
    > dumb and use the routine from Numerical Recipes.


    I'm less familiar now with the statistical decision theory stuff than when
    I was actively studying it -- but I don't think I've ever heard much about
    x-y exchange *as a purely statistical procedure.* The closest thing I can
    drag off the top of my head is the principal components stuff--but most of
    that is used as an aid to factor reduction rather than an end-all
    statistical procedure by itself.

    I just looked up the black hole mass-velocity dispersion stuff. It's
    interesting for two reasons:

    1. When I gave my "straightening scatterplots" lecture about a month ago I
    had to search around for data I could use for examples. Next year perhaps
    I'll use some black hole data.

    2. I can only see the abstract of the Tremaine article (2002) so this is
    perhaps both unfair and premature but this reinforces something else that
    I occasionally mention in my lectures: that the statistical techniques
    developed in different fields are optimized to handle different kinds of
    issues. Econometric techniques (and techniques developed in the other
    social sciences) tend to be much more focused on dealing with the
    consequences of crappy data than the techniques used in the physical
    sciences, which focus more on the efficiency of the estimator.
     
  5. Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I'm less familiar now with the statistical decision theory stuff than when
    > I was actively studying it -- but I don't think I've ever heard much about
    > x-y exchange *as a purely statistical procedure.* The closest thing I can
    > drag off the top of my head is the principal components stuff--but most of
    > that is used as an aid to factor reduction rather than an end-all
    > statistical procedure by itself.


    Maybe you'd be interested in this:

    http://bayes.wustl.edu/etj/articles/leapz.pdf

    A rather long saga, which like Proust's could only be brought
    to a conclusion by the death of the author.

    > I just looked up the black hole mass-velocity dispersion stuff. It's
    > interesting for two reasons:


    > 1. When I gave my "straightening scatterplots" lecture about a month ago I
    > had to search around for data I could use for examples. Next year perhaps
    > I'll use some black hole data.


    > 2. I can only see the abstract of the Tremaine article (2002) so this is
    > perhaps both unfair and premature but this reinforces something else that
    > I occasionally mention in my lectures: that the statistical techniques
    > developed in different fields are optimized to handle different kinds of
    > issues. Econometric techniques (and techniques developed in the other
    > social sciences) tend to be much more focused on dealing with the
    > consequences of crappy data than the techniques used in the physical
    > sciences, which focus more on the efficiency of the estimator.


    Oh, sorry. Damn journal publishers. You can get the full text here:
    http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0203468
    Many of the references can also be found in full-text version by
    searching here:
    http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph

    The abstract doesn't capture the statistical-method smack-talk
    that is in the body of the paper, although one of their points
    is that the difference in statistical methods is not as big as
    their colleagues/mortal enemies have claimed. Science and
    rbr have a lot in common actually.

    It does seem that different fields have very different needs
    from statistics. However, in astronomy, we have no shortage of
    crappy data, or data with substantial selection effects.
     
  6. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

  7. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

  8. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:41:54 +0200, Robert Chung wrote:
    >> http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/velocity-dispersion.txt

    >
    > Thanks, just what I needed to keep my mind off the beautiful weather
    > outside.


    In that case, I'll mention that it took me three tries to find a
    linearizing transform that works better than log(velocity) vs. log(mass),
    better in the sense of goodness-of-fit (which is an excellent example of
    why I'm not a fan of using goodness-of-fit as a model selection
    criterion). It took me three tries because I screwed up the first try, so
    a guy like you ought to be able to do it in two.

    The Milky Way seems out of place.
     
  9. On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:45:19 +0200, Robert Chung wrote:
    > The Milky Way seems out of place.


    It not being a black hole, fortunately, may have something to do with
    that. Just guessing though; I hate astronomy, hate it, hate it. (One
    less than cyclingforums.com).
     
Loading...
Loading...