Re: Announcing New Blog
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:46:59 GMT
"Jay Dee" <ais01479_at_aeneas.net> wrote in message
> mountain man wrote:
>> "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne_at_acm.org> wrote in message
>>>>Database systems is an evolving environment.
>>>>Date's pedagogy on the RM is not.
>>>>It has been static for nigh on 30 years.
>>>The thing is, pedagogy needs to connect with theory.
> Just as practice needs to connect to reality -- as illuminated
> through theory.
Practice also illuminates and guides the evolution of theory, or should, unless one believes in the misconception that the RM (essentially unchanged since the 1970's) is the final say in the evolution of database systems theory.
FYI, I do not subscribe to this assumption.
>>>I don't see that relational theory has materially progressed in the
>>>last twenty years.
>> It hasn't.
> Think of it as you do our understanding of gravity; once you get it right,
> there's no need to change it.
Typical misunderstanding. The fact is that the theories of gravity that have evolved to this time explain the quantitative effects of gravitational interaction such as missile trajectories, and planetary motion, but none of them offer any causal explanation as to why the mathematics works.
Our understanding of gravity, if you research it, is far from complete and there are numerous integrity exceptions to the current theories. For example, GR was unable to explain the gravitational behaviour of certain galaxies, and required an additional hypothesis, namely that there must exist some 'dark matter and energy' to explain the variation between GR and observation. The anomolies of the Pioneer and other space craft exiting the solar system are further exceptions that tell us that what we know is at best only a quantitative approximation to what is really happening.
Other gravitational anamolies include those associated with a number of Bore Hole experiments, and, at the fringe of science are the published experiments of Maurice Allais (Nobel Lauriet in Economics) regarding the perturbation of a paraconical pendulum during the path of a solar eclipse in 1950's, and subsequent experiments.
Reality does not come attached with a little yellow sticker saying congratulations, you have now got it right, no need to ask any more questions because we know everything.
>>>In a way, it's like the challenge of getting a Ph.D in Shakespearean
>>>literature. Doing a Ph.D requires having something new and novel to
>>>say about the area of study. As you approach 500 years since the
>>>death of the author, it gets increasingly difficult to find anything
>> Database systems are not the product of one author
>> and are constantly evolving; the theory is not keeping
> Please don't confuse database implementations with theory. Few
> systems have succeeded in reaching first base.
According to certain theorists only, notably those who have such an agenda whereby their theory is the be-all and end-all of theories. Quoting the philosophy of theorists such as Date does not impress.
The RM is part of a puzzle, not the solution. This has absolutely nothing to do with confusing theory with implementations.
>> We need a theory not just of the data, but of the data
>> and its processing, which will address stored procedure
>> objects (ie: processes) which are today, and not 30 years
>> ago, capable of being stored and managed within the
>> database systems environment.
> For this, I suggest Eric Hehner.
Thanks, I'll have a look around.
-- Pete Brown IT Managers & Engineers Falls Creek Australia www.mountainman.com.au/softwareReceived on Wed Jan 18 2006 - 09:46:59 CET