Re: Do Data Models Need to built on a Mathematical Concept?

From: Marshall Spight <>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 17:53:06 GMT
Message-ID: <6Kbua.768545$F1.97710_at_sccrnsc04>

"Neo" <> wrote in message
> I think one is missing the bigger picture. In mathematics, it is not
> primarily about making a definition for the sake for having a
> definition that everyone can agree on. Until recently didn't humans
> define the world as being flat and Earth the center of the universe!

No, they did not. They *thought* that the world was flat, but they didn't *define* flatness as being "the shape of the world." It looks pretty clear to me that you don't understand what a definition is. A definition is a statement about a word and what it means. It's not a statement about the world; it's a statement about a word!

> The bigger picture is that,
> in mathematics, we strive to make our definition convey/match reality
> as much as possible

No, I don't think that's what we do at all. Physics is about reality; math is about numbers. They are not the same.

Marshall Received on Wed May 07 2003 - 19:53:06 CEST

Original text of this message