Re: Hamilton's Rule: a free lunch

>>>>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?

BOH:-
What is left from what?

JE:-
Hamilton's rule is supposed
to be a fitness road map. Suddenly 
no road map exists, i.e. we have gone 
off the map because zero fitness is
represented. However a real fitness 
still remains. What biological fitness 
actually remains when rb-c=0?

Perhaps you claim that no fitness, at
all, anywhere within biology remains? 
This would be the equivalent of suggesting 
that because the weather man is on strike 
no weather will eventuate tomorrow. I am 
sure the Mad Hatter would agree....

Best Wishes,

John Edser
Independent Researcher
PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

[EMAIL PROTECTED]