|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What have we accomplished? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
PaulK will now explain the difference between neutral evolution and selective evolution using Markov chains. He will then show us how to write the correct transition matrix to include the effects of selection. But first, he's going to use the Jukes-Cantor model to show how he is directly related to bananas.
You've been so helpful in my misunderstand until now.PaulK writes: I’m sorry that I’m not a better teacher then. But until you understand that Jukes-Cantor models neutral evolution - because that is the dominant form of DNA evolution - you will remain hopelessly wrong on the subject.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17907 Joined: Member Rating: 7.2 |
The models we have were produced by people far better informed than I. You could actually try to understand them instead of dismissing them because you don’t understand them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
Of course, you won't give us the explanation of how to include selection in the Jukes-Cantor model. You first have to understand how the Jukes-Cantor model works as written. And you don't. If you want to know how to rewrite the Jukes-Cantor model to include selection, you will have to read my next paper which you so kindly helped lift the writer's block I was having in writing the conclusion to that paper.
PaulK will now explain the difference between neutral evolution and selective evolution using Markov chains. He will then show us how to write the correct transition matrix to include the effects of selection. But first, he's going to use the Jukes-Cantor model to show how he is directly related to bananas.PaulK writes: The models we have were produced by people far better informed than I. You could actually try to understand them instead of dismissing them because you don’t understand them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
quote:RAZD is dead? The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
yes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8654 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 7.0 |
RAZD is dead? Yes, he is gone. Please go to In Memoriam: RAZD and leave a message for his family.Factio Republicana delenda est.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17907 Joined: Member Rating: 7.2
|
quote: Oh, I think I know, but it wouldn’t be very sensible for reasons that should be obvious. But you won’t see them.
quote: If there is a paper I very much doubt that it will include any such thing. And if it is presented as a correction to the model it will doubtless be laughed at.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
You fish to mammals aficionados really have wild imaginations. If you think you understand the Jukes-Cantor model, show us how to solve for the equilibrium time without assuming a Poisson distribution. You won't because you don't understand this math. I know how to do that and the math is easy. Any high school student can do the math if they passed an introductory algebra course, that is if you understand how to do the mathematics of Markov chains. And you don't. Do you know that MIT and Harvard lectures on the mathematics of Markov chains are available on YouTube? You should watch them and learn something about this math.
Of course, you won't give us the explanation of how to include selection in the Jukes-Cantor model. You first have to understand how the Jukes-Cantor model works as written. And you don'tPaulK writes: Oh, I think I know, but it wouldn’t be very sensible for reasons that should be obvious. But you won’t see them.Kleinman writes:
You have a sickness PaulK. If you think that giving the correct explanation for the evolution of drug-resistance and the failure of cancer treatment should be laughed at, there is something wrong with your mind. Why is it so important to you to believe that fish can evolve into mammals when you can't correctly explain simple evolutionary experiments such as the Kishony and Lenski experiments?
And you don't. If you want to know how to rewrite the Jukes-Cantor model to include selection, you will have to read my next paper which you so kindly helped lift the writer's block I was having in writing the conclusion to that paper.PaulK writes: If there is a paper I very much doubt that it will include any such thing. And if it is presented as a correction to the model it will doubtless be laughed at.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 661 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
Again you're not paying attention. Bananas and humans are distant cousins. There is no direct cousin-to-cousin line of descent. Of course, if you want to explain the bananas-to-ringo evolutionary process, we would find that very amusing."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17907 Joined: Member Rating: 7.2 |
quote: So you can’t see the obvious problems.
quote: It’s funny then that you’re the one who keeps failing to understand. Or demonstrate any real mathematical ability.
quote: I think not.
quote: I certainly don’t think that. That idea is a product of your vivid - and sick - imagination. Get help. You need it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
So, in your vivid - and sick - imagination, you think you understand the mathematics of the Jukes-Cantor model. The Jukes-Cantor model is a time-dependent problem so it must have some initial condition. Tell us what that initial condition is and whether it is a scalar, vector, or matrix.
If you think that giving the correct explanation for the evolution of drug-resistance and the failure of cancer treatment should be laughed at, there is something wrong with your mind.PaulK writes: I certainly don’t think that. That idea is a product of your vivid - and sick - imagination. Get help. You need it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17907 Joined: Member Rating: 7.2 |
quote: I’ve proven that I understand it better than you, although that is a low bar, accomplished by reading a couple of web pages - both of which you’ve cited.
quote: I really don’t have to jump through hoops for you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
You don't know! You don't understand the Jukes-Cantor model. You just like blowing smoke. But that's all right, you still helped me with my writer's block.
The Jukes-Cantor model is a time-dependent problem so it must have some initial condition. Tell us what that initial condition is and whether it is a scalar, vector, or matrix.PaulK writes: I really don’t have to jump through hoops for you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17907 Joined: Member Rating: 7.2 |
quote: If that was true I wouldn’t be so successful in pointing out your grievous errors.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 584 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman writes:
Don't do it for me, do it for your fellow fish-to-mammals aficionados. You don't know! You don't understand the Jukes-Cantor model. You just like blowing smoke.PaulK writes: If that was true I wouldn’t be so successful in pointing out your grievous errors. The Jukes-Cantor model is a time-dependent problem so it must have some initial condition. Tell us what that initial condition is and whether it is a scalar, vector, or matrix. Jump through that hoop for your fellow fish-to-mammals aficionados. I don't need you to do that for me, I can answer that question. You can't. All you can do is blow smoke and very stinky smoke it is.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024