NurseAsh_DET said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
NurseAsh_DET said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at NurseAsh_DET’s question from a different direction. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
One concrete data point for the thread. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
dave_SLC said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I read this differently from dave_SLC, on substance rather than tone. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.