Re: A DECLARATION OF MEANING
From: John Edser (edser_at_tpg.com.au)
Date: 08/03/04
- Next message: Tim Tyler: "Re: what is life"
- Previous message: Wirt Atmar: "Re: Looking for a word similar to self-evident, self-creating"
- Maybe in reply to: John Edser: "A DECLARATION OF MEANING"
- Next in thread: P: "DECLARATION OF MEANING"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:18:04 +0000 (UTC)
"Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@sbcglobal.net>
> > > JE:=
> > > Within Hamilton's rule the two fitnesses
> > > being compared are inclusive fitness
> > > (rb) and Darwinian fitness implied as
> > > as just the cost (c).
> > NAS:-
> > This is wrong. Conventionally, inclusive fitness is r b - c, not r b.
> JM:-
> This is also wrong. At least as Hamilton defined inclusive fitness in
> 1964. He defined it as something like (K + rb - c), where K would be
> the fitness that an organism would have if all social interactions were
> excluded (and the costs of those interactions).
> Inclusive fitness as you have defined it and inclusive fitness as
> Hamilton defined it maximize together only if there are no pleiotropic
> effects that modify both K and (rb-c).
JE:-
Jim, this form is only for
reference purposes. NAS is
attempting to debate what
I wrote in this form rather
than debate these concepts
in another thread
_after_ NAS had finished
completing it. Until NAS
completes the form debating
these issues is just a waste
of time. Please complete
this form yourself so your
view can be understood
and debate, productive.
I will complete your simulation
questions after and not before,
you have completed this form.
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia
edser@tpg.com.au
- Next message: Tim Tyler: "Re: what is life"
- Previous message: Wirt Atmar: "Re: Looking for a word similar to self-evident, self-creating"
- Maybe in reply to: John Edser: "A DECLARATION OF MEANING"
- Next in thread: P: "DECLARATION OF MEANING"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
