I am curious as to why a likelihood ratio cannot give positive evidence for the null, since it is a model comparison.
Indeed, this is more confusing given the fact that Bayes Factors are similar comparisons (nearly equivalent in some cases) and yet can give evidence for the null.
Why can a likelihood ratio not give evidence for a null, but a Bayes factor can?
EDIT: Please see comment from @Silverfish explaining how this question is not answered by previous posts about NHST. Essentially my question asks: why do we treat evidence from likelihood ratios differently to evidence from Bayes factors, when both are model comparisons? This is not the same as ‘why can’t we accept the null in NNHST?’ Which is a question I understand.