John Edser wrote:
>>BOH:-
>>Where, in the inequality rb>c are OFM and OFA distinguished?
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>They are supposed to be distinguised by the 
>>sign  of c which we agree cannot be distinguished
>>because the sign of c remains _arbitrary_. 
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> No!  You distinguish it by measuring it.  It's simple empirical science. 
>   It even fits within a Popperian framework.
> 
> JE:-
> "You distinguish it by measuring it"?
> Measuring exactly  **WHAT** ?
> 
c, or to be more precise the difference in fitness (or fitness 
component) betweeen individuals that carry out the behaviour, and those 
that do not.

> 
> 
>>I include this missing term thus:
>>
>>		rb>K-c
>>
>>Where
>>
>>K has the value of cmax.
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> This isn't Hamilton's rule...
> 
> JE:-
> That is correct.
> It is a _corrected_ version of it
> where the rule becomes NON ARBITRARY.
> Now the sign of c becomes definitive for 
> OFM, _only_. 
> 
> 
>>BOH:-
>>Now it is perfectly clear that
>>only OFM is operating within
>>Hamilton's rule. 
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> ... so this statement is misleading.
> 
> JE:-
> "misleading"?
> 
Yes.  As you agree that it is not Hamilton's rule, you shouldn't make 
statements which assume that it is.



Bob

-- 
Bob O'Hara
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
P.O. Box 4 (Yliopistonkatu 5)
FIN-00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Telephone: +358-9-191 23743
Mobile: +358 50 599 0540
Fax:  +358-9-191 22 779
WWW:  http://www.RNI.Helsinki.FI/~boh/

Journal of Negative Results - EEB: www.jnr-eeb.org
---
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 3/8/04 3:25:06 PM