Re: Friendly amendment to Motion 25
Nate, p1788,
This short comment on a hurry, before the end of the discussion period
I greatly appreciate your effort to take into account the variable
dependence
I am very skeptical if it could work, but if it really does i would be
very glad
At the present time I am unable to decide if will vote for or against
this motion.
IMHO too many information are missing
I would like to find
1) The list of the so-called "native" decorations for a
single variable or when all the variable are independent
2) A formal definition of a dependent variable. What
dependence are allowed? What dependence are not worked out?
3) A definition of the domain of a function with dependent
variables
4) A definition of C D+ and D- with independent variable
and with dependent variables.
5) A completely worked out simple example ( f(x,y) = x*y
with y = x is enough )
Dominique
Nate Hayes a écrit :
P1788,
In light of recent discussions, I submit the attached PDF as a
friendly amendment to Motion 25.
Since there appears to be strong agreement between myself,eJohn and
Arnold on the treatment of the min and max operations, I have moved
this out of the rationale and into the motion text.
To capture other ground which appears to have been gained, I also
added a new section in the rationale entitled "Towards a Foundation of
Decorations" that I hope people will consider.
Sincerely,
Nate Hayes
--
Dr Dominique LOHEZ
ISEN
41, Bd Vauban
F59046 LILLE
France
Phone : +33 (0)3 20 30 40 71
Email: Dominique.Lohez@xxxxxxx