John Edser wrote:

> ->>>JE:-
> 
>>>>Without the inclusion of a constant term for
>>>>at least the total resources partitioned within Hamilton's
>>>>rule, then the resource costs, which absolutely limits
>>>>what is finitely _possible_ in fitness increases for
>>>>all recipients, then the rule permits ANY increase that may
>>>>be necessary, even just an _impossible_ increase, to
>>>>get the altruistic gene to spread.
> 
> 
>>>NAS:-
>>
>>>From your earlier posts it seems that this talk about the need for
>>
>>>some constant stems from set theory.  I have only a modest familiarity
>>>with set theory, so could you please explain exactly why the constant
>>>is needed, rather than just asserting that it is.
> 
> 
>>>JE:-
>>>A constant/maximum is always required because 
>>>it alone provides an absolute _supposition_,
>>>i.e. a fixed point of logical reference.
> 
> 
>>BOH:-
>>Good.  Will you allow us to use zero as a constant?
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>Do you mean zero or nothing?
>>These two views are _not_ the same.
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> Zero.  That's why I wrote "zero".
> 
> JE:-
> Zero is not a constant it is just
> another number that may or may not
> be used to represent a constant
> term within a mathematical expression.
> 
What?  Do you mean zero can vary?

Bob

-- 
Bob O'Hara

Rolf Nevanlinna Institute
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/
---
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 11/10/03 3:33:49 PM