jim_asheville said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.
jim_asheville said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from jim_asheville — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Dr.KarenChen said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Pushing back on Dr.KarenChen here. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.