Re: [FRIAM] Rude nutter and group chat

As a follow up. I can't leave on iOS either. First of all it'sdishonerable and rude to do so in the first place. Also because Carla does only News. I do not do 24/7 news. I do not do news in general. Humans have this strange pathological desire to keep harping on stuff well beyond their cont

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

Instead of "if A is true then B is true" think "if I know the value of A then I know something about the value of B". For instance A = age and B = income. --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Mon, Dec 20, 2021, 2:03 PM wrote: > I think yo

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

You might also take a look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_graph We briefly discussed this awhile back: https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2020-December/086342.html On 12/20/21 13:02, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: I think you mean by a "fork" what we call a "common cause

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

I think you mean by a "fork" what we call a "common cause". When two variables are correlated it may be that they have a common cause. Sober’s word, not mine. Yours is the meaning he seems to give it. The whole article concerns how a causal “fork” breathes life into hypothetical “inner”

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

Frank, Ok, so one of the problems here is an unfortunate coincidence concerning the word independent. In psych talk, an independent variable is one that the experimenter is freely able to manipulate. So in your causal collision example, in psych talk, both A and B are independent of one an

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

I resisted this earlier because it seems like you want to avoid learning math. But, it seems to me that "screening off" is just a special (and less useful) example of what's called an "articulation point" (or cut point) in graphs. https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ArticulationVertex.html Maybe if

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

Taken in reverse order: 3) Yes, with A ⇒ B ⇒ C, A is behind the screen we call B. But notice that with A ⇐ B ⇐ C, B still screens off C. Flipping the arrows is one way to permute the sentence. Another way to permute the sentence is: C ⇒ B ⇒ A. Instead of flipping the arrows, we flip the senten

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

>order of events is crucial for screening off. Not correct. My offer stands. I understand if you want to wait until covid risks are negligible. Alternatively I could discuss a PowerPoint presentation that I wrote years ago via Zoom. Frank --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe,

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

Thanks, Glen, for putting your shoulder to my wheel here. My first objection is rhetorical. You don't write an abstract about collisions to introduce a paper about forks, not, at least, without explaining yourself somewhere in the article. Second, as the "formula" for screening off, wi

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

I think you mean by a "fork" what we call a "common cause". When two variables are correlated it may be that they have a common cause. --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Mon, Dec 20, 2021, 8:17 AM uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote: > > I don't understand y

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

I don't understand your criticism. What do you think is "cocked up"? [⛧] I'll take a swipe at what might be the problem: The concluding paragraph seems to make the point that forks *are* (reversed) collisions and collisions are (reversed) forks. The key may lie in some preemptive registration o

Re: [FRIAM] Dear Long Suffering Colleagues

I'll put it in my terms which will reduce the chances of my making an error. If A and B are both causes of C then A is not independent of B given C. C is a collider. --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Sun, Dec 19, 2021, 11:09 PM wrote: