The logic of the hypothesis does not require specification of either one of these so let us call it the 'recorder' and let it, for the sake of argument, be a protein changing its conformation over time.
A surprising side deduction along the logic of the hypothesis is that complex, biosynthetic amino acids might have entered the genetic code earlier than simple, prebiotic amino acids, which is opposite to the common sense.
Despite the attractive logic of this hypothesis, all of these studies suffer from a potentially fundamental shortcoming; that recordings have not distinguished between slow and fast motor neurons.
For the vespine wasps, we extend the logic of the pathogens hypothesis to propose another factor nest site that may be involved in the evolution of multiple mating and multiple paternity.
Previously, one of us (ES) has formulated this precisely: logic dictates the hypothesis of direct interactions between RNA and amino acids in the emerging RNP life, but corresponding binding sites may not have anything to do with the current cognate triplets [ 9].
According to the logic of null hypothesis testing, a small P-value allows us to reject the null hypothesis at some specified "level of significance" [ 47, 57, 64, 65, 74- 76].
For example, according to the logic of null hypothesis significance testing, an E-value of 10 does not mean that the sequence alignment is likely to be random — it simply means that a random alignment could easily have resulted in the observed level of sequence similarity.
Following the logic of the "center of origin" hypothesis [16], it seems reasonable to expect that protists from the polar regions, having evolved over that relatively short period of time, would form few (perhaps no) "old" unique clades, and would fall into groups characterized by deeply rooted thermophiles.
In accordance with the logic of hypothesis testing, we draw attention to the significance level when interpreting parameter estimates.
Dempster-Shafer functions are primarily employed as a logic of the evidential support for hypotheses.
The case they make against Darwinism does not rest on the authority of Scripture; rather, it proceeds from premises that are scientific and philosophical, invoking esoteric ideas in molecular biology, information theory and the logic of hypothesis testing.
