***** Continued From Previous Message *****
 > > > > BOH:-
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as the rule is concerned, none.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------- end quote --------------------

> > > > > _____________________________________________
> > > > > > > > NAS:-
> > > > > > > > Okay, here is my comment:
> > > > > > > > If c is supposed to represent what
> > > > > > > > I think it means, i.e. the cost in
> > > > > > > > Hamilton's rule, then it is neither
> > > > > > > > an absolute measure of fitness nor
> > > > > > > > a relative measure of fitness, but
> > > > > > > > is rather a marginal fitness cost.
------------- end requote -----------------------------

You wrote:-
the cost in Hamilton rule: "is neither
an absolute measure of fitness nor
a relative measure of fitness, but
is rather a marginal fitness cost."

If you cannot follow/remember your own
train of thought how can sbe reader's
believe that you can follow a contesting
argument?

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com
---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/4/04 12:34:45 PM