I propose an actual definition for impendence, which should work equally well for probablity, quantum mechanics, and snide comments during re-org announcement meetings: "Impendence is the probability of a possible upcoming event, coupled with its time offset from t=0 (a.k.a. 'now'). Impendence is a function of probability (IMP approaches 0 as p approaches zero, and approaches infinity as p approaches 1), and is inversely proportional to time offset. As an extension of this concept, an event's Loominance is an event's Impdendence coupled with its Graveness."

I propose an actual definition for impendence, which should work equally well for probablity, quantum mechanics, and snide comments during re-org announcement meetings: "Impendence is the probability of a possible upcoming event, coupled with its time offset from t=0 (a.k.a. 'now'). Impendence is a function of probability (IMP approaches 0 as p approaches zero, and approaches infinity as p approaches 1), and is inversely proportional to time offset. As an extension of this concept, an event's Loominance is an event's Impdendence coupled with its Graveness."

It must obviously be impedance. The last two terms are the current into the victim, so the voltage is the impedance times the current.

Hi Martin, After our phone conversation, I too Googled both impendence and impendance. From the results I received, it was obviously a typo. I was just surprised at the number of Web sites that showed the error. A large number of those sites also had the correctly spelled word, elsewhere within the specified documents which enforces the "typo" theory. If you find further technical evidence to support impendance as the correct term, I'll be happy to see it .