Kay,
> the latter is _not_ a systematic error; rather, you are sampling (once!) a
> statistical error component.
OK. Other words, what is potentially removable error is always
statistical error, whether it is sampled or not.
So is it fair to say that if there are some factors that I either do not
know about, willfully choose to ignore or just cannot sample, then I am
underestimating precision of the experiment?
Cheers,
Ed.
--
After much deep and profound brain things inside my head,
I have decided to thank you for bringing peace to our home.
Julian, King of Lemurs
