On Friday, November 8, 2013 10:39:38 PM UTC, Bart Goddard wrote: > Paul <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in > > news:email@example.com: > > > > > On Friday, November 8, 2013 6:10:06 PM UTC, Bart Goddard wrote: > > >> Timothy Murphy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in news:l5dg9v$tn6$1@dont- > > >> > > >> email.me: > > > > >> > It's clear that the upper limit is 1, > > >> > since n pi mod Z will be distributed evenly in [0,1), > > >> > and so will infinitely often be in the range (1/3,2/3). > > > > >> I don't think this is true. |Sin(n)| is probably > > >> distributed evenly, but raising to (1/n) power is going > > >> to crowd things toward 0. > > > > > > This sounds ambiguous to me. Do you mean that you don't think it's > > > true that the upper limit is 1 or do you mean that you don't think > > > it's true that it's clear that the upper limit is 1? > > > > Neither. Obviously the thing I don't think is true is the > > sentence to which I'm responding: That the values > > of |sin n|^(1/n) are evenly distributed. You could > > infer this by my coment about the (1/n) power pushing > > things toward zero. > > > > It has already been proven that the limit is 1.
Thanks for the clarification. However, your "obviously" is probably incorrect because it confused someone else on this thread besides myself.
If something you say confuses a large number of people, then, by definition, your meaning can't be "obvious".
Here I'm assuming that the two people who misunderstood you are a representative of a larger sample of would-be readers who would be confused.
On the other hand, if 58,732 people read your comment and only 2 people misunderstood you along the lines on which I misunderstood you, then yes, your meaning was obvious.