Hey L&G-

         I just wanted to relay something I learned from studying arithmetic and statistics for the GMAT. When you hear people say 'null hypothesis' it means some theory to be tested. It does not refer to the default position in the state of nature [where no such phenomenon occurs], rather a speculative thesis to explain why that phenomenon occurs. Statistical convention assumes that a speculative thesis is wrong and that the observed phenomena simply occur by chance.

         Therefore, the test of the 'null hypothesis' will determine whether the hypothesis is indeed nullified or [not] nullified. e.g., According to American law, a person is [assumed] innocent until proven guilty, therefore, a [defendant's] guilty verdict would be considered the 'null hypothesis'. In fact, a prosecution will attempt to [not] nullify the [null] hypothesis that the person is innocent. The idea of such a hypothesis and it's verification (or lack thereof) through [a trial] is simple, yet the verbiage to describe it is somewhat abstruse.

         Personally, I think that obfuscation, generally, is a conspiracy meant to keep the privileged on top and the less fortunate on bottom. Actually, sometimes confusing things are just that, but many times - too many times - people make things harder than they need to be. It's been said that my generation is about order, that we like to categorize and get things in their proper place. There's a lot of info available in this age, but unfortunately, it seems like people are getting [a lot] dumber. Truly, we must guard the national constitution by continually updating our own. I hope we can joyfully devote ourselves to a lifetime of learning and sharing. That would be nice.