Originally Posted by makeinu
The point is not whether or not there are other nuances or nonidealities in the freewheel that transfer this difference back through the pedals. The point is that the nature of the freewheel, by it's very purpose, is to dampen such effects. On a perfect freewheel you would not be able to tell and you have have no feedback, while on a perfect fixed gear the feedback would be total and complete. Obviously nothing is perfect, so a real freewheel ends up somewhere in the middle, but it can't give the same amount of feedback as a fixed gear, otherwise it wouldn't be a freewheel.
Your very abstract ideals of a "perfect" freewheel and fixed gear are completely counterintuative. The smoothest, most refined freewheel imaginable would only make the distinction between freewheeling and wheel sliding more easy to discern. At any rate, this is a moot point. Feedback about traction and control come from all of your senses. At most, the feedback of your feet exerting force on the pedals is only a minor part of a cyclists sense of traction. The supposed extra control of a fixed gear would not even be an issue of debate if this were not the case. Your sense of balance and the g-forces exerted while cornering and braking, are way more critical for sensing traction and when you loose it. Clearly freewheels are sufficient for 99.99% of all cyclists, including extreme forms of cycling such as downhilling or XC racing, where traction and control are much more critical than normal bike riding. If freewheels diminished feedback about traction to the exagerated extent that you are claiming, they'd all be riding fixed gears.