Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 268: Line 268:  
:::::::::I'm sorry, I thought you were asking for help.  Anyway, the article on [[Scientific method]] ''on this wiki'' states that the reason for an experiment is to test an hypothesis - so it's not my opinion but what this Wiki states.  I suppose you could edit the article so this it reflects your view of how science works. --[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 06:24, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:::::::::I'm sorry, I thought you were asking for help.  Anyway, the article on [[Scientific method]] ''on this wiki'' states that the reason for an experiment is to test an hypothesis - so it's not my opinion but what this Wiki states.  I suppose you could edit the article so this it reflects your view of how science works. --[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 06:24, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:::::::::Reading Lenski's recent paper for comprehension reveals that the hypothesis being tested is that development of the Cit+ strain is a historically contingent process (that is, arising by multiple steps separated over time). The null hypothesis (not supported by the results of the experiments) is that the Cit+ strain arises by a single, exceptionally rare event.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 10:52, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:::::::::Reading Lenski's recent paper for comprehension reveals that the hypothesis being tested is that development of the Cit+ strain is a historically contingent process (that is, arising by multiple steps separated over time). The null hypothesis (not supported by the results of the experiments) is that the Cit+ strain arises by a single, exceptionally rare event.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 10:52, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
:::::  ''"Reading Lenski's recent paper for comprehension reveals that the hypothesis being tested is that development of the Cit+ strain is a historically contingent process (that is, arising by multiple steps separated over time)."''
 +
:::::I was aware that one of the original goals of the experiment was to test for historical contingency -- that was the reason for freezing the populations at each 500th generation.    My questions were about other things:  (1) was Cit+ evolution an original goal of the experiment (remember that this whole experiment started in 1988,  long before the study in the present paper),  (2) was favoring Cit+ evolution a purpose or one of the purposes of the glucose-cycling (giving the bacteria insufficient glucose supplies so as to cause alternating glucose feeding and starvation),  and (3) what were other purposes -- if any -- of the glucose-cycling.    Zachary Blount did not give a straight answer to the first question and gave no answers at all to the latter two questions. [[User:LarryFarma|LarryFarma]] 13:12, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:::::::''"I'm sorry, I thought you were asking for help."''    You call that "help"?  All you did was clutter up this talk page with your irrelevant "hypothesis" idea.  With friends like you,  who needs enemies? [[User:LarryFarma|LarryFarma]] 10:34, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:::::::''"I'm sorry, I thought you were asking for help."''    You call that "help"?  All you did was clutter up this talk page with your irrelevant "hypothesis" idea.  With friends like you,  who needs enemies? [[User:LarryFarma|LarryFarma]] 10:34, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
::::::::When did I call it help? I said that I thought you were asking for it. In any event Brossa seems to have clarified the situation.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 11:38, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
 
::::::::When did I call it help? I said that I thought you were asking for it. In any event Brossa seems to have clarified the situation.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 11:38, 29 June 2008 (EDT)
20

edits

Navigation menu