Re: SproutMethod.pdf

From: Bruno Desthuilliers (bdesth.nospam_at_removeme.free.fr)
Date: 11/22/03 

Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 11:29:33 +0100

Tsolak Petrosian wrote:
> Bruno Desthuilliers <bdesth.nospam@removeme.free.fr> wrote in message news:<3fbe758b$0$9329$626a54ce@news.free.fr>...
>
>>Tsolak Petrosian wrote:
>>
>>>Bruno Desthuilliers <bdesth.nospam@removeme.free.fr> wrote in message news:<3fbe2e34$0$2807$626a54ce@news.free.fr>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Tsolak Petrosian wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The key purpose of software is to simulate real world
>>>>>which inherently
>>>>>makes it to behave like real world (human psychology etc) which
>>>>>implies that applying math to software is equal to applying math to
>>>>>real world.
>>>>
>>>>Err... I'd really like to see you mathematically prove what you assert.
>>>>
>>>>(snip)
>>>>
>>>>Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>>x=y => x*z=y*z or x+z=y+z
>>>
>>>:)
>>
>>tss.... you're not proving anything here. Please prove that :
>>
>>A : "The key purpose of software is to simulate real world"
>>B : "software behaves like real world"
>>C : "real world is 'human psychology etc'"
>>D : (A implies B) and C
>>E : D implies that "applying math to software is equal to applying math
>>to real world".
>>
>>Unless you prove A and B and C and D and E, your argument is not valid.
>>(and please, as their are many boolean notations, use 'and' for logical
>>conjonction, 'or' for logical disjunction, 'implies' for logical
>>implication - ie : A implies B = not A or B -, and 'not' for logical
>>negation, so anyone can read your demonstration)
>>
>>Bruno
>
>
> Lets leave the 'human psychology etc' part for simplicity.
Would be too difficult if we kept that part, hu ?-)

> Let software be S and world be W.
> Lest name the mathematical proofness as function f.
> And lets assume that S=W then f(S)=f(W).

To prove that f(S)=f(W) because [S=W] implies [f(S)=f(W)], you still
need to prove that S=W and the implication are true !-)

And the fact is that S=W is false IMHO...

> As you see there is boolean logic involved.
Right, but it's not enough... So far, you just discarded part of the
proposition and asked me to assume what I first ask you to prove !-)

But don't bother to try and prove your point unless you do it for the
fun... It was more a joke than anything else, even if I still don't buy
the S=W part !-)

Bruno

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SproutMethod.pdf
    ... >> Lest name the mathematical proofness as function f. ... Exactly its not that straighforward to prove S=W yet. ... Tsolak Petrosian ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: SproutMethod.pdf
    ... > Tsolak Petrosian wrote: ... Lets leave the 'human psychology etc' part for simplicity. ... Lest name the mathematical proofness as function f. ...
    (comp.object)