Re: Hamilton's Rule: a free lunch

John Edser wrote:
>>>>JE:-
>>>>Please replace the number "0" with a new 
>>>>defined term, within Hamilton's rule.
>>>
> 
>>>BOH:-
>>>Why?  Zero is zero in Hamilton's rule.  It's a constant.  
>>
> 
>>>JE:-
>>>This is _not_ a difficult ask. If you really
>>>think you understand what zero represents
>>>within the rule, then go ahead and replace it with 
>>>an actual algebraic term that represents something 
>>>within the science of biology! 
>>
> 
>>BOH:-
>>Why?  The zero does represent something biological.
>>It's the point in the b/c tradeoff where there is no 
>>difference in fitness between the 
>>altruistic and non-altruistic phenotypes.
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>No, it only represents a zero state of some biological
>>_unknown_. 
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> Would you care to demostrate why my statement is wrong, rather than just 
> ignoring the content of what I wrote?  I can't accept your statements 
> without you persuading me that my ideas are wrong.  And I can't do that 
>   if you don't try and say what are wrng with my ideas.
> 
> JE:-
> When rb-c=0 what is left?
> 
What is left from what?

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/