HPLC_Greg said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
HPLC_Greg said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
HPLC_Greg said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
newstart_MO said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.