Re: Proposal: 6NF

"Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1161510494.023368.205890_at_m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Brian Selzer wrote:
>> "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
>> Another dodge. You're very good at that.
> Not a dodge (for whatever that is). Such questions demonstrate only
> one thing. Your level of math is just low to realize how the question
> are.
>
>> Been there, but in their discussion of domains and codomains, they speak
>> of
>> input values and output values, so again, if a value is the output of a
>> function, and a function is defined as a mapping between a set of input
>> values and a set of output values, then clearly the definition is
>> circular.
>> If you can't see that, then perhaps you should go back to school.
> It seems you have not learned anything...
>
> Then you must have a better definition of value. You are ready to put
> in doubt one of the best established definition in science under the
> *feeling* that it seems circular. Bring demonstrations; axioms,
> theorems or shut the hell up...
>

There is a clear difference between *the* value (of a function) and *a* value. One cannot exist independent from the function for which it is an output, the other can exist independent of any function, mapping or transformation, for example, as the instance of a variable. You appear to be confusing the two mathematical senses of the word. I think that was spelled out in the wikipedia article you directed me to. Perhaps you should read the entire article.

>
>> > Besides, the fact of being by definition the output of some kind of
>> > transformation does not prevent it from being the input of another
>> > function.... DUHHHHHH!!
>> >
>> > If value B is defined as F(A) = B nothing prevents it from being an
>> > input for another function, say V that produces C and inputing...In
>> > such case, V(B) = C and therefore V(F(A)) = C
>> >
>> > There's nothing circular about that dumb ass, except in your confused
>> > mind....
>> >
>>
>> So, if value B is defined as F(A) = B, then what is A? Is it a value?
>> If
>> it's a value, then it must also be the output of a function, and so
>> on...and
>> so on...and so on: either the chain of compositions is infinite (which is
>> quite ridiculous) or the definition is circular. DUHHHHH!!
> Of course math is the science of infinite transformation.
> You are just to dum to realize that a definition can not be circular
> (for whatever that may mean). Besides *circular* mean getting to the
> same point. In what sense, defining A as an output for transformation
> G and input for transformation F makes it circular : you are using 2
> separate transformations. It would be circular if it would be both
> input and output of the same function...
> JeeeZ I feel I a talking to a retard....
>

Hello, McFly! Isn't a definition circular if any of its components' definitions invoke it?

Oh, by the way, here's what can happen when you confuse "the" with "a":

brian is a retard
brian is a person
therefore, a person is a retard
cimode is a person
therefore, cimode is a retard Received on Sun Oct 22 2006 - 17:09:43 CEST