GRGR(4) more Jess (formerly Re[2]: Pavlov and the Book)

[Paul Mackin]

David's answer to my rather prissy insistence that the British dart board
(like the Monte Carlo dice) has no memory is excellent and well deserved.
I was, as he says, engaging in Rogerspeak. But now my eyes are opened
and I will go forth to greater and undreamed of (by me) possibilities.
Already those mean densities are departing from Zero. Enlighten me, Jessica.

					P.
----------
From: 	David Casseres
Sent: 	Friday, November 08, 1996 6:28 PM
To: 	pynchon-l at waste.org
Subject: 	RE: GRGR(4) more Jess (formerly Re[2]: Pavlov and the Book)

[Paul Mackin sez]
>This isn't meant to imply is it that there is anything special about the
>FIRST throw compared, say, with the second, third, fourth or
>whatever your favorite numbered throw is?
>
>In general (apart from the value of a few warm up shots) each individual 
>throw has exactly the same probablity of a bullseye regardless of what had 
>come before (including nothing) or what would come after.

Roger Mexico would say that too, but no one else in this part of the book 
would pay any attention.  That Roger, who's so caught up in the 
irrationality of being in love, gets stuck with being the one character 
around who stands up for rationality at least some of the time.  Sez, 
that's just a Poisson distribution, but nobody nose what that might be...

Cheers,
David