One concrete data point for the thread. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Late follow-up. I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
anna.melb_AU said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Pushing back on anna.melb_AU here. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsanna.melb_AU said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
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.
anna.melb_AU said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.