Re: Objects and Relations

On 15 fév, 18:05, Gene Wirchenko <g..._at_ocis.net> wrote:
> "Cimode" <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> This so wrong it hurts my head.
> >OK let's try this again...
> >Does it hurt your head to admit that 2 spheres having the same
> >location (same center) should be discerned and that such
>
> A sphere is the volume enclosed by the set of points a specified
> distance or from a center point. If the distance is different, the
> sets are obviously different, though the smaller is a subset of the
> larger. A sphere's location can be defined by x,y,z, *and* r.
>
> >discernability is impossible if location XYZ is chosen as a primary
> >key for Sphere relation.
>
> Oh, dear. You did incomplete analysis and left out r.
JOG's initial premice did not assume any radius but only XYZ. I wanted to demonstrate that it would be sufficient. I guess if you were not so obsessed with nailing me down on that you might have imagined that I could have done it purposely.

[Snipped]
> We can discern them by considering the different radius.
And that supposes changing the initial statement of XYZ being the key.
> (x,y,z) does not suffice. Add radius.
Agreed. But that changes the initial premice of discussion. Received on Thu Feb 15 2007 - 19:56:33 CET