Re: Temporal database - no end date

>> And as we all know: in science, everything is determined by
>> majority vote.

I'm not comparing anything. Your objection to a discrete model of time as stated was simply that a majority disagrees. That is vacuous; I just pointed it out for the benefit of people who aren't familiar with your work.

> In logic, we know we have a problem when the real
> world and the logical system do not match. Zeno's paradoxes were
> written off by Aristotle as sophisms; he never answered them. In fact,
> nobody really did realize that Zeno was on to something until we got
> the concept of a continuum of real numbers and calculus.
>
> Chronons are rejected by the majority of Temporal DB researchers for
> logical reasons, not religiious ones.

That sounds more useful. Can you please present these reasons? And don't just say "Zeno".

>> And the logical impossibility of tachyons is of course directly
>> applicable to how we choose to model limited aspects of reality
>> in our database systems.

This is still just handwaving. Show us the simple logic instead of talking about science fiction.

>> And in Java, you can use the same operators on a list of Apple
>> objects as on a list of Orange objects.

So what? Straw man. List is a type generator (sort of) in Java; Interval is a type generator in Date, Darwen and Lorentzo's (DDL) model. Is your best, most "logical" argument against the use of intervals over salesman numbers that it "feels weird"? And don't give me the crap about them not being a continuum; in that case you are criticizing a muddle of your own  preconceived notions and the DDL model, not the DDL model as such.

-- 
Jon