"John Edser"  wrote in message
news:...

> Absolute fitness is defined as:
> The total number of fertile forms
> reproduced into one population by
> a parent.
> 
> This will consist of
> n generations where n is
> only _minimally_ = 1.

Okay, I've only just looked at this thread. I'm still not 100% sure I
know what John is getting at, but it seems that his definition of
fitness takes in descendants more distant than one's own offspring. Is
this correct?

If I have understood correctly, then the definition is useless until
we have defined n. What, exactly, is n?
---
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 8/8/04 9:57:34 PM