Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 03:35:57 GMT
Message-ID: <xUzrc.91756$536.15748076_at_attbi_s03>
"Anthony W. Youngman" <wol_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:sFcs6eBT2+qAFwPo_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk...
>
> If we can't set up an experiment (even a Gedanken thought experiment),
> then relational theory is not provable, therefor it is not scientific,
Correct, relational theory is not scientific.
> therefor it is irrelevant to the real world, therefor why the hell are
> we using it :-)
Because it is *mathematical.*
I can imagine giving you a four function calculator, and you saying,
how can I devise a real-world, scientific experiment to verify the
validity of this thing, and then throwing it out because you couldn't.
Four function calculators are not scientific, but they are still useful, mathematically.
> As a scientist/engineer type, not a mathematician, I want some
I am a computer scientist, which is a kind of mathematician.
I have no illusion that what I do relates to the physical world.
> experimental proof at least.
> Unfortunately, all the (anecdotal) evidence
> I have says that other models work better ...
I have this gedanken experiment that says, what if I have two apples and I try to take away three. In the real world, I get an error, because once I have taken away two, I no longer have any apples that I can take away. Therefor, only positive integers are scientific. I have no use for negative numbers because they are not scientific, either, since there are no negative numbers I can observe in the natural world.
Marshall Received on Sat May 22 2004 - 05:35:57 CEST