Re: Resiliency To New Data Requirements
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:57:45 GMT
Message-ID: <dkRBg.36509$pu3.479885_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> My sweet lord!
>
> Neo has discovered that everything is a thing! This seems to be the
> ultimate "theory of everything" (T.O.E.)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:57:45 GMT
Message-ID: <dkRBg.36509$pu3.479885_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
David Cressey wrote:
> "Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154968099.257427.212440_at_i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>>My suggestion for most general uses only a single concept: set. >> >>In my search for the most general method of representing things, it >>appears I may have re-invented via trial and error what is essentially >>the basic part of lambda calculus and set theory. What lambda calculus >>calls expression, and what set theory calls set, is what I have been >>calling thing. Thing is the general form of all things.
>
> My sweet lord!
>
> Neo has discovered that everything is a thing! This seems to be the
> ultimate "theory of everything" (T.O.E.)
Don't you mean the BIG theory of everything? (BIG T.O.E. ?) Received on Tue Aug 08 2006 - 02:57:45 CEST