Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

patterns-discussion - Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions

patterns-discussion AT lists.siebelschool.illinois.edu

Subject: General talk about software patterns

List archive

Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions


Chronological Thread 
  • From: phillip henry <ph1ll1phenry AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Messaging Design Pattern <dsheppard2k AT yahoo.com>, Christian Köppe <christian.koppe AT hu.nl>
  • Cc: "patterns-discussion AT cs.uiuc.edu" <patterns-discussion AT cs.uiuc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions
  • Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:21:00 +0000 (GMT)
  • List-archive: <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/patterns-discussion>
  • List-id: General talk about software patterns <patterns-discussion.cs.uiuc.edu>

Hi, Al,

Just another note.

When you say: "[f]or instance I'm not sure what the drawbacks of gravity or force are" I don't think anybody is disagreeing.

Physicists do not debate the drawbacks of gravity. They do, however, debate the drawbacks of our different *models* of gravity.

The Newtonian theory of gravitation describes it as a force whose magnitude is subject to an inverse square law. Einstein's theories superseded Newtons, describing gravitation in a radically different way: not so much a force as objects following geodesics in spacetime. Both give similar results in non-extreme circumstances. And even though we prefer Einstein's theory to Newton's, Newton's is perfectly adequate for most applications - including sending man to the moon.

In short, in physics we too build models, debate their merits and chose the one that is applicable to the problem we are trying to solve.

But nobody is saying that they are without drawbacks.

Regards,

Phill





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page