AmyNC_wife said:

I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

AmyNC_wife said:

I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.

Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

AmyNC_wife said:

I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.

This answered a question I did not know how to ask. I will report back once I have actually tried it.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.

Dr.RaviCardio said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Posting only so the count is not one.