Following on from Dr.NutriCornell — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Following on from Dr.NutriCornell — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
NauseaFreeNow said:I changed one thing, left everything else alone, and waited the full interval before looking.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
NauseaFreeNow said:I changed one thing, left everything else alone, and waited the full interval before looking.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNauseaFreeNow said:I changed one thing, left everything else alone, and waited the full interval before looking.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.