Re: Temporal database - no end date

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:09:21 GMT
Message-ID: <Bgqsh.3119$1x.53836@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Marshall wrote:

> On Jan 20, 2:05 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> 

>>Marshall wrote:
>>
>>>On Jan 18, 5:56 pm, "-CELKO-" <jcelko..._at_earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>You don't really think that discrete salesmen and the time continuum
>>>>are structurally alike, do you??
>>
>>>You don't really think that 64 bit ints and 64 bit floats are
>>>structurally different, do you?
>>
>>>All of your continuum-based arguments are irrelevant to digital
>>>computers; they can't handle a continuum anyway. There are
>>>no irrational numbers reified anywhere in your computer's memory,
>>>and there never will be.
>>
>>Unicode reifies the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its
>>diameter as a symbol. That ratio is provably irrational. It is true the
>>point amounts to a trifling semantic quibble. However, the nit opens you
>>to pointless criticism and provides a foil by which the
>>self-aggrandizing ignorant can elevate the image of his nonsense by
>>comparison.

> 
> Well, pooh. "Reified" is the best term I've been able to come up
> with for the difference between a number represented algebraically
> and one spelled out as a binary quantity. Do you have a better
> one? (And in fact I could argue that your usage of the word
> is nonstandard.)

How about 'calculate' ? Nobody will ever exactly calculate an irrational number. At best, one can approximate the number even if one can approximate the number to any arbitrary precision. Engineers of course realize that too much precision is just a waste of time due to the limited accuracy of our measuring devices.

Joe lacks both the finesse of a mathematician and the sense of an engineer. I might suggest he is the mathematics analogue of a chainsaw carpenter except I don't think his toolbox has anything more incisive than a dull axe.

My usage might very well be nonstandard within some limited scope and that limited scope might very well contain all of c.d.t. However, I suggest the term is largely unfamiliar even within that scope, and the dictionary definition opens the doors to the nitpickers. Received on Sat Jan 20 2007 - 09:09:21 CST