# [ExI] CQT Researcher Uncovers Quantitative LinkBetween Quantum Non-Locality and Uncertainty.

spike spike66 at att.net
Wed Dec 8 17:52:36 UTC 2010

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:58 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] CQT Researcher Uncovers Quantitative LinkBetween Quantum
Non-Locality and Uncertainty.

spike wrote:

we know god is a bastard

But god is real, unless declared an integer.

John K Clark

That bastards who invented that system should be scorned.  In mathematics,
all integers are real.  Computer science should not have used that
terminology.  The use of the term integer is OK, but instead of real, the
floating point variable should have been called. floating point, or decimal
or EE or something besides real.  Real is taken.

Computer science is filled with mathematical ugliness.  Consider the command

X = X+1

Aaaarg!

To a mathematics fan, it just looks wrong and ugly.  It is = abuse.  It
implies that 1=0.

We know it is shorthand, and actually means

X(t+1) = X(t) + 1

but I have never liked the shorthand version of it.  The FORTRAN guys set
the precedent, which messed up a lot of later computer languages.  They
should have used the <- symbol as ADA does, instead of the =, because
dammit, = is sacred!  When you see = that means the stuff on the left of
that = is the same as the stuff on the right!  = is powerful!  It forms the
basis for =ity, which is good.  = should always = = and only =.  Otherwise
it sounds like ".depends on what your definition of is is." Well, is is is,
and = = =!  = is is! Is = =!

I = }8-[ about integer not = real.

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20101208/66cf7129/attachment.html>