The suspense continues!
Mar. 22nd, 2006 05:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
teleribSo... the torque data.
Really, you don't need to know what I mean by "the torque data." It's some data, just a subset of the overall data I'm looking at. A thing.
A very uncooperative thing. It should have done X. But it didn't do X, it did Y. So I looked at it for a good long while and said, "Oh! I bet I know why it didn't do X. I need to add some Xness, and then it will do X."
So, add some Yness and sit back. And, yea verily, the data comes back a little more like X but still pretty Y. Hm.
"Well, maybe it's because I'm also asking for Z, and Z can undo X. It shouldn't have to, but maybe that's the case? Let me remove Z and see what happens."
And while that's running, I look at the code again. I've been looking at the code, with a vague feeling that there's something wrong. I check the graphs that gave birth to the code. Check. I check the math I did when I solved for A in terms of B instead of B in terms of A. Yes, all in order.
Math is tricksy. Sometimes, you take squares and suddenly all the negative numbers go away. Was it something like that? I decided to plot A in terms of B just in case. No, it looked exactly like the equation I had...
Except for the constant. I had A = f(B). The plot had A = (some number)*f(B).
All my other programs like this one? Compute (some number). Here, it had escaped me.
So. Well. Back to Square One.
The good news? The great news? If it does X now, I'm done. Done done done done done. DONE. I was right and my method works.
The bad news? It might still do Y. I have to wait and see. And it might take a while to see. And if it does Y, I'm back to the drawing board with trying to figure out why.
Really, you don't need to know what I mean by "the torque data." It's some data, just a subset of the overall data I'm looking at. A thing.
A very uncooperative thing. It should have done X. But it didn't do X, it did Y. So I looked at it for a good long while and said, "Oh! I bet I know why it didn't do X. I need to add some Xness, and then it will do X."
So, add some Yness and sit back. And, yea verily, the data comes back a little more like X but still pretty Y. Hm.
"Well, maybe it's because I'm also asking for Z, and Z can undo X. It shouldn't have to, but maybe that's the case? Let me remove Z and see what happens."
And while that's running, I look at the code again. I've been looking at the code, with a vague feeling that there's something wrong. I check the graphs that gave birth to the code. Check. I check the math I did when I solved for A in terms of B instead of B in terms of A. Yes, all in order.
Math is tricksy. Sometimes, you take squares and suddenly all the negative numbers go away. Was it something like that? I decided to plot A in terms of B just in case. No, it looked exactly like the equation I had...
Except for the constant. I had A = f(B). The plot had A = (some number)*f(B).
All my other programs like this one? Compute (some number). Here, it had escaped me.
So. Well. Back to Square One.
The good news? The great news? If it does X now, I'm done. Done done done done done. DONE. I was right and my method works.
The bad news? It might still do Y. I have to wait and see. And it might take a while to see. And if it does Y, I'm back to the drawing board with trying to figure out why.
