Dr.RenalNash said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
Dr.RenalNash said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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 correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsClosing the loop on my own question.
Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause. Leaving the original post as written rather than editing it, so the mistake stays visible for whoever searches this next.
LipidDoc_ATL said:Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.
Pushing back on LipidDoc_ATL here. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.