Re: Can these constraint be implemented in an RDBMS ?

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:c25ipv$bc9$1_at_news.netins.net...
> "Roy Hann" <rhann_at_globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:c25hm1$m7k$1_at_sparta.btinternet.com...

> Our OED CD is with the hubby right now, but count me as someone who uses a
> dictionary well into adulthood. I don't think I'll be outgrowing that. I
> did figure I should get ribbed for using dictionary.com. When there are
> disagreements on the meaning of a term in a language, a dictionary is a
> valuable tool for advancing the discussion, in my opinion.

Then you are mistaken. The job of a dictionary is to publicise the (inferred) meanings that writers have intended when they used a word. It certainly does not certify that the intended meaning is correct, only that the word appears to have been used that way. Thus the dictionary defines "transistor" as a radio even though it is no such thing.

> [snip] I have made the claim that while it is
> conceivable that I am stupid, I am not ignorant of mathematics. So, if
you
> took it as a boast, please revise your perception on that.

I took it to mean that you want to be regarded as a mathematician. In the absence of demonstrated mathematical skills--which would lead us to regard you as a mathematician--it is just a claim. And since it is intended to raise our estimation of you, it is a boast, until it is demonstrated. It's like claiming to be a genius, or a great lover, or a psychic. (Of course you can undoubtedly produce the diploma, but that would be very much like producing a dictionary definition.)

> > By my understanding of the term "theory" there is no such thing as an
> > "untested theory". There are theories, which are coherent, tested, and
> > provisionally accepted, and there is the rest: hypothesis, conjecture,
> > misconception, fantasy, and drivel.
>
> You mean like the big bang theory and the creation theory, right?

Well you've hit the nail on the head for once. The Big Bang "theory" is no such thing; that is the sloppy colloquial name for a whole class of competing and rapidly changing hypotheses and conjectures that face new criticisms and contradictory evidence almost every week. If a theory of the origin of our universe ever does emerge (i.e. gains provisional acceptance) it seems very likely that it will be different from anything on the table at the moment.

I've never heard of creation theory. Where do you place that on my spectrum?

Roy Hann Received on Thu Mar 04 2004 - 13:21:59 CET