Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?

From: Alfredo Novoa <>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:27:35 GMT
Message-ID: <>

On 14 Jun 2004 14:05:14 -0700, (Todd B) wrote:

>Axioms are based within a system of thought. For example, Euclid was
>thinking about planar geometry. Is it possible that if your straight
>line bent by space could not connect two points in that space? Ah,
>then you might think, "Well then, it's not a straight line anymore."
>But from who's perspective?

From the planar geometry perspective.

> I'm thinking about Einsteinian physics,
>or even touching on n-dimensional concepts.

But this is not the case. Euclids postulates are about planar geometry and only about that.

> Axioms just set down
>rules (and the rules don't have to make 'sense' in the real world) for
>a logical system. They are not 'true' inherently to the real world.
>They simply are a base for logical deduction. Although looking back
>at your post, we may be thinking the same thing.

Yes, I completely agree with you. Axioms are independent to the physical world.

>Referring to this earlier post, I'd say: Newton's laws are not
>postulates (axioms). They are theorems in physics based upon his
>original hypotheses.

And in observations of the physical world.

>> It is a very bad use of the terms. Postulates are not assumptions,
>> postulates are axioms: truths.
>Well said, but, truths in the real world, or within the system?

Within the system. We can not know if something is true in the physical world.

>Because I can build any logical system with a set of axioms. They
>will always be true (if they don't contradict each other) because
>that's where I started.

If they contradict then they are not axioms.

> I made them true, like an act of God.

They were always true because you are saying the same in two ways.

When you say line you are saying the shortest join of two points. Axioms are redundant.

>"Nothing is True" -- not a Zen koan, but very paradoxically

Like: all generalizations are bad :-)


There are two groups of people in the world; those who believe that the world can be divided into two groups of people, and those who don't. :-)

  Alfredo Received on Tue Jun 15 2004 - 18:27:35 CEST

Original text of this message