dic, but we shall see that the ways they fail to be ergodic (and thus remain in the conceptual context of ergodic measures) are descriptively useful (Mandell and Selz, 1997a). The emergence of many statistical approaches to characterizing these motions have been accompanied by the expected controversies abo

., Abarbanel, H.D. |. (1990) Lyapounov exponents from observed time series. Phys. Rev. Lett. 65:1523-1526 Bullard, W.P., Guthrie, P.B., Russo, P.V., Mandell, A.J. (1978) Regional and subcellular distribution and some factors in the regulation of reduced pterins in rat brain. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Therap. 206

inically relevant global electrophysiological phenomena such as Magoun’s (1954) brain stem evoked EEG and behavioral arousal (Nicolis, 1986; Selz and Mandell, 1992; Mandell and Selz, 1993). In the early 1940’s, using the pre-publication results of similar analog computer studies (Levinson, 1949), the Camb

70 --- PAGE BREAK --- FORM APPROVED OMB No. 21204042 WIRED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF PIANSPORTAT1ON IIIIIIIPUU. AVIATION marrnmnosetesta 'Mandell, Aan0WARWAL CENTER AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION APPIJCAT1CN CERT: ISSUE DATE REGIVIVROSTANUMBER N -7g., r 8 MOO& de ITO f copier A Si '64:1 °NuM.4 S

epare his defense, (2) avoid unfair surprise to the defendant at trial, and (3) preclude a second prosecution of the same offense." United States v. Mandell, 710 F. Supp. 2d 368, 384 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)). On the other hand, the Court must balance these interests against the harm to the Government from restr

n omitted); see also, e.g., United States v. Mahabub, No. 13 Cr. 908 (MN), 2014 WL 4243657, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 26, 2014) (same); United States v. Mandell, 710 F. Supp. 2d 368, 384 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (same). "Acquisition of evidentiary details is not the function of the bill of particulars." United States

n omitted); see also, e.g., United States v. Mahabub, No. 13 Cr. 908 (MN), 2014 WL 4243657, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 26, 2014) (same); United States v. Mandell, 710 F. Supp. 2d 368, 384 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (same). "Acquisition of evidentiary details is not the function of the bill of particulars." United States