Dan wrote:
> Kenneth Downs <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net> wrote in message
> news:<n72pkc.f8h.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net>...
>> Here is a little its-been-a-good-week Friday musing.
>>
>> I wonder if database theory is suffering from a version of what is going
>> on
>> in Physics. In Physics for the past few decades they have had to
>> struggle with the fact that the two fundamental theories of the twentieth
>> century do
>> not play nice together. Relativity describes gravity well, but it is not
>> a
>> quantum theory. Quantum theory is considered the most successful theory
>> in history, but does not describe gravity. Since most physicists believe
>> that the underlying truths are quantum in nature, everyone is searching
>> for a quantum theory of gravity, instead of searching for the
>> relativistic theory of E & M and nuclear forces.
>
> [snip]
>
> I remember these discussions from earlier in this newsgroup <ugh!>.
> It also seems that others have been discussing this very topic.
>
> Here is a dialog on the subject:
> http://www.dbdebunk.com/page/page/1383843.htm
>
Well, I think dialog is a strong word when discussing the work of Mr.
Pascal. There are some pearls there, but the static sometimes gives me a
headache.
--
Kenneth Downs
Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to
email me
Received on Fri Oct 15 2004 - 21:57:04 CDT
