"Perplexed in Peoria" 

> > I don't care HOW you measure relatedness,
> > how can ANY measure of relatedness be
> > <0 within ANY science of biology?

> JM:-
> This is explained without much math in:
> "A geometric view of relatedness", Alan Grafen, 1985
> http://users.ox.ac.uk/~grafen/cv/oseb.pdf
> You don't even need to know what a regression coefficient is.

JE:-
Thank you for this reference. I have 
read it and remain happy to debate its 
content in another thread.

In BIOLOGICAL TERMS relatedness is 
just genes held in in common.
How this can be measured remains a 
problem. However the concept determines
what is to be measured, the measuring
system does NOT determine the concept.

Hamilton's rule attempts to 
measure relatedness using a probability.
IBD relatedness is only the probability that 
you inherit a gene from a defined biological 
source that is the same gene (i.e. is
not a mutation of that gene). Thus, -IBD 
relatedness is nonsense. This is why
NAS insists that IBD was misused. The entire rule
is proven misused any time -r is allowed within it.
This is why -r never appears within Hamilton's rule.

A regression coefficient is just a statistical
rework of reality just like any simple average is. 
If the average total fitness is 2.67, then absolutely
NOBODY can be average because the fraction is
BIOLOGICAL NONSENSE unless it is reworked into
some kind of a representation of a BIOLOGICAL 
REALITY. The applies to any measure of -r.
It has to be reworked into zero or a positive number. 
_______________________________________________________
In ANY BIOLOGICAL relatedness concept you can only 
be related or not related, you cannot be less than not 
related, no exceptions, no matter how you attempt
to measure it.
________________________________________________________

NAS has already made the drastic error of mistaking 
just a statistical maximand for a real one but he 
(and  yourself it seems) will never learn from _gross_ 
biological errors. Now NAS is insisting that 
Prices statistical rework using a regression  
coefficient can replace a REAL concept
of relatedness. Suggesting the measuring system
(a regression coefficient) allows it turns biology into
a Mad  Hatter's Tea Party. Any -r using any statistical
rework must translate into a REAL measure of r (a
refutable hypothesis of r within biology) that
is minimally zero just like any average of total fitness 
has to rework itself into simple whole number. Without such 
a BASIC translation into A REALITY the MODEL -r is entirely 
MISUSED. This sort of nonsense is happening all the time 
within gene centric Neo Darwinism because it has been taken 
over by biologically illiterate mathematicians.

You can't seem to see that the only VALID use mathematics
has to biology is how maths can be VALIDLY interpreted within
biology. You refuse to see that no unambiguous interpretations
of organism fitness altruism exists within Hamilton's rule.
Like Dr O'Hara and all the Neo Darwinists that post
here, you refuse to see that you are misusing the 
rule because you put the mathematics FIRST and
the BIOLOGY last. Here is an example:-

--------------quote----------------------

1) 22/01/2004:

JE:-
What is the difference between
a reduced positive c and a negative c?
If c was an abolute measure of fitness
then yes, a real difference exists. However
c is only a relative fitness cost and not
an absolute fitness cost, so what is the
difference?

BOH:-

As far as the rule is concerned, none.

----------- end quote --------------------

Please state UNAMBIGUOUSLY if you agree
or do not agree with Dr O'Hara's answer.
If you wish to qualify your answer 
_afterwards_, then please do so.

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au





>snip unjustified denigration<

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 8/6/04 6:19:27 AM