reckoning a fault may have been scryed…

the fault:

absence of an ideal, being a template/baseline as near perfect as can be conceived.

shouldn't observations be measured against the ideal before forming conclusions?

comparing against results from other observations without that "ideal" comparison seems flawed.

thinking it should kinda be like taking many measurements from the same edge.

can't recall any "expert" defining an ideal before presenting conclusions.

eye missing something? field vocab mabes?