Settling — where it appears
Named by 22 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The window nobody varied
Every parastichy pair reported for the settling table was counted over the top two hundred organs of a run, and that number had never been moved. Moved seventeen ways across a factor of forty, on all three hundred and eighty-four settled runs, it changes nothing at all.
A sequence that was a reading
One of the settling table's additive sequences rested on a single count that skipped a term, and the account of it was that the count had been taken over the wrong patch. It was not. The counter works out whether its two families wind opposite ways and the reading throws the answer away, on five runs in three hundred and eighty-four.
A destination or a refusal
Sixty-three wrecked runs were regrown to twelve hundred organs and put to the settling table's own criterion, unchanged in every tolerance. The prediction written down before the sweep said twenty-nine would settle; seventeen do, and the prediction is wrong on its own side of the table as well as in its total.
Like with like
Seventeen wrecked runs settle when regrown to four times their length, and every one of them settles at the divergence the short run already reported. The endpoint moves by four thousandths of a degree at worst, which makes the short reading precise about where and silent about whether.
What a run length was hiding
The settling criterion returns an identical verdict on all sixty-three wrecked runs at every length from three hundred organs to twelve hundred, so run length explains nothing. What the sweep does find is that an endpoint is a mean over an orbit, and thirty-four refusers never come within a degree of their own reported endpoint.
A basin with no upper edge
The widest basin in the settling table had a width bracketed between 47.5 degrees and about 57, and closing a bracket means sampling near an edge rather than everywhere. Three basins cut at a quarter of a degree located all six of their boundaries, and the widest turned out to run out of basin at 180 degrees rather than reach an edge on that side at all.
A wall or a fade
A basin's border is either a change of destination or a stretch where the angles stop settling at all, and nothing here could tell the two apart. Two instruments were pointed at the question: the settling clock, which looked obviously right and fails, and the tail spread, which was already being computed on every run and had never been read.
The angles left over
A stem started anywhere on the circle was assumed to end up in one basin or another, so that the settled destinations divided the starting angles between them. Twenty and a quarter degrees swept without a hole at a quarter of a degree find 1.75 degrees between two basins that reaches neither of them and nothing else, and a three-degree void beside it.
What a quarter degree cannot see
Six boundaries were located to an eighth of a degree, three basins were named and one width was quoted, and every one of those readings has the same floor under it. The sweep's grid is one step of the grid the stems are placed on, so nothing here bounds a basin narrower than half a degree — and the widest basin's own middle was never swept at all.
The level was doing the ordering
Four falloff exponents have been put in order by the rise at which half their runs stop settling, and a half is the only level that order has ever been read at. Read at nine levels the same runs give ten different orderings of the same four numbers, and the one comparison in the whole study that resolves runs the other way.
Four walls closer than they looked
Two of the four falloff exponents had a wall with no upper end at all, and the other two were located to factors of two and a half and nearly four. Nine rises at eighty starting angles close every bracket — and the four walls turn out to sit inside a factor of 1.111 of one another, which is narrower than the narrowest bracket.
Two refinements that do not multiply
The design that located the wall did two things at once — doubled the starting angles and halved the rise spacing — and the arithmetic behind it assumed each would buy about a factor of two. The finer rises did ninety-nine per cent of the narrowing and the doubled angles added under one, because a bracket's ends are rises and no error bar can move them.
A maximum in the gap
Four falloff exponents have refused to separate on every quantity this thread has read off them, and the wall that was supposed to tell them apart cannot. Two of the four carry a maximum in the settling share at a rise the published list stepped straight over, and it is there in both halves of the sampling independently.
A basin has a width
A destination reached from one starting angle is a presence. A destination reached from seven consecutive starting angles spanning forty-five degrees is a basin with an extent, and nine angles could not have measured one — they were too far apart to have two of them land in the same place.
A wall that stopped moving
Four falloff exponents were reported not to move the rise below which stems stop reaching a lattice. Their measured walls spanned a factor of two and ordered themselves 2, 5, 3, 4. At twenty starting angles they span a fifth of one and order themselves 5, 4, 2, 3 — so the conclusion was right and its arithmetic was noise.
Round numbers are not a sample
The nine starting angles the settling table was grown from reach a lattice four times in ten. Eight angles placed exactly halfway between them reach one a quarter of the time. The difference is not noise and it is not the range — several of the nine sit next door to somewhere a stem could settle.
Twenty angles instead of nine
Every claim in this collection about where a stem ends up rests on nine starting angles a cell, and the file that uses them says so — it computes a binomial error of 0.17 and declines to read a spread against it. Eleven more angles halve that error and change what several of the numbers were.
A wrecked run goes somewhere
Where a wrecked stem finishes was called unstable. Half of them finish within a degree of a destination measured from intact stems started at arbitrary angles — two tables that share no run, no design and no question.
Forty angles, and a limit
Nine starting angles turned out to be a biased sample of the circle, and doubling to twenty said by how much. Doubling again says the estimate is converging — to a smaller correction than one doubling extrapolated to.
A wall that was never measured
Three samplings of the starting angle give three orderings of the four falloff exponents' walls and a spread that does not shrink, while every error bar behind them halves. The reason is that a wall is a crossing of a nearly flat curve, and nobody had asked how well it is located.
A list that can only shrink
The destinations only a steep falloff reaches grew from three to five when the sampling doubled, and everyone read it as a list filling in. Doubling again takes two off it, which is the only direction a list defined by an absence can ever move.
A basin that doubled
A run of consecutive starting angles reaching one destination is a basin, and its width is a lower bound. Halving the spacing doubled the angles in the widest one and left its width alone, which is what a real basin does and a sampling artefact does not.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Honest limitsClaim testingSamplingStarting angleFalloff exponentNegative resultBasinMeasurement errorAttractorResolutionDivergenceInstrument setting