Dr.EM_Chicago said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Agreeing with Dr.EM_Chicago, and the qualification matters more than the agreement. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
BenResearch_OR said:Agreed, with a caveat about community reputation: it is a lagging indicator.
That reframing is the part I needed. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Dr.EM_Chicago said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. No action needed from anybody.