I disagree with this approach. It does not prove that the null hypothesis is true, only that it is better than an alternative model.
Rather than trying to prove that a quantity is identical to zero, I would rephrase the problem as trying to determining what the quantity is, and giving a confidence interval for it.
When the confidence interval has become sufficiently small, and includes zero, then we may say that any difference is neglible.
Rather than trying to prove that a quantity is identical to zero, I would rephrase the problem as trying to determining what the quantity is, and giving a confidence interval for it.
When the confidence interval has become sufficiently small, and includes zero, then we may say that any difference is neglible.