"Perplexed in Peoria"  wrote in
message news:...
> "Name And Address Supplied"
 wrote in message
news:ce36t2$13nb$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> > "John Edser"  wrote in message
news:...
> > > JE:-
> > > You have (again) failed to fully
> > > answer this question. How can this
> > > marginal fitness cost differ to
> > > BOTH a  relative AND absolute
> > > fitness cost?
> > >
> >
> > Because w[x], w[x]/E[w], and dw/dx are all distinct, right?
> 
> Hmmm.  I might have written:
> "Because (w[x']-w[x]), ((w[x']-w[x])/E[w]), and dw/dx are all
distinct".
> 

Sorry, was being sloppy and referring to fitness rather than any
particular component of fitness (costs/benefits).

> I hope that this will all become clearer in the responses to the
> "experiment".  Though there really is no application of dw/dx there.
> Perhaps NAS can suggest an alternative biological situation in which
> it would be applicable.

I haven't had time to look through the "experiment" yet.

The sign of dw/dx determines the direction of change in E[x] under the
action of natural selection. It applies to all natural selection.
---
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 7/30/04 4:47:37 PM