X-Received: by 10.182.18.102 with SMTP id v6mr15766840obd.11.1422833365866; Sun, 01 Feb 2015 15:29:25 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.60.71 with SMTP id f7mr98364igr.10.1422833365677; Sun, 01 Feb 2015 15:29:25 -0800 (PST) Path: news.cambrium.nl!textnews.cambrium.nl!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!195.208.113.1.MISMATCH!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.glorb.com!hl2no6974733igb.0!news-out.google.com!qk8ni19782igc.0!nntp.google.com!hl2no5259501igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 15:29:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=101.175.1.237; posting-account=bFMNewoAAAAHC6b_JPlV7XvI31zIuG5T NNTP-Posting-Host: 101.175.1.237 References: <61044dae-51c9-43d4-87f9-1e12e0e3b15e@googlegroups.com> <2807ea7c-a50e-4a67-8357-2ccd0bdc9e57@googlegroups.com> <6cc9b130-6adc-494f-905a-b43a343416c5@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <3db26254-29be-4a55-8869-eecfa48cda12@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Why are [Database] Mathematicians Crippled ? From: Derek Asirvadem Injection-Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 23:29:25 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.cambrium.nl Tegiri > On Monday, 2 February 2015 05:43:34 UTC+11, Tegiri Nenashi wrote: >=20 > Certain poster on this group is emphasizing how theoretical stuff such as= normalization theory has no real impact in practice.=20 1. Just in case you might be talking about me (emphasis on "might"). I sa= id no such thing. Normalisation is essential in practice. Normalisation i= s a science. As usual, in this space, the theoretical portion of the scien= ce is a small fraction of it. Practitioners practice the science, not the = theory. Normalisation, if viewed or known *only* as the theory, is very fr= actured, isolated, skewed, a collection of fragments. Eg. as a collection = of the NF definitions. =20 And half of the NF definitions are pure pig poop, straight out of the sow's= backside. By schiz, and or schiz. Undamaged humans do not need them. 2. And in the case that you might be talking about another "certain poster"= (emphasis on "might"), your statements are unfair, a false representation = of what he posted. I am not suggesting you are dishonest, just that you ar= e viewing something in the physical universe from the tiny /alien/ lens of = theory, your religion, as you have demonstrated, and thus unconsciously por= traying it in a skewed as simplistic manner. I don't have a problem, none = at all, if you do that. But when you post that skewed view in the physical universe, then I have to= respond. If you care to read the rest of that post, you might notice, the gentleman = gave concrete instructions re Normalisation, without labouring through the = fragmented theory, which AFAIC, was the perfect pitch to the level of the s= eeker. ---- Please be advised that when I teach RDb Design, Normalisation is a major su= bject, and I approach it as science. The first thing I do is excise the ab= normal "normal form" definitions which are marketed by the schizophrenics t= hat wrote them, retaining the three Normal Forms that undamaged human being= s need. Then I teach the science, complete with exercises that use several= tables (frauds use single "relations" to construct their Straw Man argumen= ts; papers; mathematical poofs). Then I teach the two scientific Normal Fo= rms that are /informally/ but scientifically (at least to those who have th= eir feet on the ground) defined in the Relational Model (the concrete Codd = RM, not the 42 religious artefacts). Sum total in the scientific universe: the five scientific Normal Forms, and= the rest, a pile of poop, in the toilet. Sum total in the far reaches of the galaxy, your precious theoreticians rel= igious position: the huge pile of poop, and three Normal Forms which are on= ly slightly understood. That, of course, has a crippling effect. The fact that theorists in our field have been unable to collect the bag of= "normal forms" that they themselves have defined, into one coherent whole,= that can be used as a method, is evidence that they are clueless about the= /exercise/ of Normalisation, that they only understand the fragmented bits= , and that, only in isolation. Like blind men defining as elephant. The fact that the theorists continue to define schizophrenic "normal forms"= , the purpose of which is to justify Record Filing Systems that are non-rel= ational, in forty five years, stands as evidence that the theorists in our = field understand only Record Filing systems. The fact that the theorists continue to define schizophrenic "normal forms"= , but have been utterly unable to /formally/ define the two NFs in the RM, = in forty five years, stands as evidence that our field is devoid of theoret= icians who understand the RM, they are completely impotent at articulating = it. It is no wonder that they count fish in the sea. I am happy to take Normalisation (science vs alien theory) up, but we shoul= d start a separate thread. > That is because this is a field which patiently awaits its time.=20 Waiting for the Second Coming, I suppose. Promises, promises, promises. But no delivery. Religion again. All gas a= nd no excreta makes the act of sitting on the toilet extremely boring, it i= s a wasteful use of time. And to be complete, you are not talking about our field, you are talking ab= out the tiny fraction of it that is occupied by theoreticians. Who, by vir= tue of the evidence, have produced nothing that has benefited the field (th= e whole field, not the fraction) in forty five years. > I would rather discuss this, rather than importance (or lack of thereof) = of nulls. There is a current thread, The Null Problem is a Non-issue, sitting there w= ith no progress. I am about to close it as confirmed, given that the pries= ts can't deny the concrete facts. I would be happy to discuss it, especial= ly if you remove your mitre and leave the bishopric for a few minutes. I a= gree, the importance (or lack thereof) of nulls is not the main issue. Cheers Derek =20