Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 03/07/05
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Previous message: David Cross: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:33:08 -0500
Albert Wagner wrote:
>
> I'm just guessing without a comprehensive re-read of this subthread.
> But I think what Neil and others are really doing is compensating for
> the lack of a randomly accessible database of infinite numbers. With
> such a database, no ordering would be required. Without such a database
> then either (a) the set must be ordered or (b) a sequential search for a
> match must be done for each iteration. Thinking like a programmer:
> This is analogous to the matching of transactions to histories in
> pre-database punched card days. But I am a programmer, not a
> mathematician. So YMMV.
If you want to do mathematics think like a mathematician, not a
programmer. The programmer's stock and trade consists of algorithms and
their implementations on specific machines in the context of specific
operating systems.
The mathematicians stock and trade consistes of theorems derived from
postulates.
Bob Kolker
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Previous message: David Cross: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|