Re: Can relvars be dissymetrically decomposed? (vadim and x insight demanded on that subject)
Date: 16 Jul 2006 13:38:57 -0700
Message-ID: <1153082336.946705.229490_at_i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Aloha Kakuikanu wrote:
> Cimode wrote:
> > In general, relvars themselves, as opposed to their projections .
>
> By "projection" you don't mean RA projection, or do you?
What does RA stand for?
I mean relvars projections from multidimensional representation to
bidimensional representation as Rtables.
> BTW, Bourbakism is the worst thing that happened to math in 20th
> century.
That's an opinion I respect but I do not quite agree with because it is
simplyistic.
Because of its associative structure, early century Bourbakism math showed some fuzziness but it has been reaching maturity in the sixties with very rigorous formalism. Do not forget that we owe to Bourbakism very important axioms and symbolic (*Whatever x*, *belong to* math operator). But Bourbakism is not the issue here...I am interested in your insight about the topic brought up which is relvar characterization.
Feel free to refer to other mathematics tools to help deal with the question of relvar nature. Received on Sun Jul 16 2006 - 22:38:57 CEST