Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
while the laws of physics may be about physical reality, they are not it. they are theories about it. the same relation applies between rddl and a namespace. Jonathan Borden wrote: > > I want to clear up what may be a misunderstanding that I may have promoted. > > ... > > So yes, a namespace is a set, but can be, through indirection, thought of as > more. In my example, which I need to clarify, I discuss Euclidian > geometry/Newtonian Mechanics and very briefly String Theory. My idea of > using this as an example is that while our space _looks_ 3 dimensional to > us, as we look deep into an atom, many higher dimensions seem to appear > (e.g. String Theory), so that the _analogy_ is simply that while a namespace > looks like a simple set, one might look inside and derive a more complex > structure. as long as one is clear, that this derived structure is not the namespace. > This is simply an analogy that I am making (it is not in the RDDL > spec) > > Jonathan >
|
