I will be compiling nonfiction in the link to the side. I have done so for a few pieces of ready, but more will come.
Monday, December 22, 2014
relational database management 3
3
So let's go over
the two glitches that we have. One is the longitudinal glitch. We're
do you start longitude? In one case it simple  0°. but that only
works when you know where zero is. Where you have nothing, then that
is zero. But what about the case where you don't have nothing? Let me
explain. Look at the world, and tell me where nothing is. There is
not a point on the globe, which you can point to, which has
“nothing”. You have to just pick on arbitrary point, which in the
case of the world is 0° Greenwich Mean Time. But that only was true,
universally, from 1884. for the time though there were conventions,
and the most common of which was GMT, there were other points that
could be used. And of course, because this was a fight between
capitals, everyone had a different angle. Some wanted Greenwich,
others preferred Washington, Paris was common, and so was St.
Petersburg.
What this led to
was a series of prizes, 1567 Philip the II of Spain offered a prize,
and Philip the III of Spain increased it 1598. Holland offered a
prize in 1636. then Louis XIV offered a prize in 1666. only in 1714
was written entered in to establishing a prize. Note that these were
on the Atlantic seaboard. There is reason for this, which does not
take any time to figure out. Countries on the Atlantic seaboard were
going to be the ones who would benefit the most from longitude.
What everyone
figured out, was the relationship between time and longitude. In this
period they were not treating numbers as a kind of clock, that would
be a different insight. That cards would be a kind of time didn't
enter in to anyone's equations. And we will get to reading of cards
in the next chapter with Pascal. So what everyone was thinking had to
do with a round sphere, and which point on it is Zero Meridian. And
as you can see from the prizes, offered by Spain, Holland, France,
and finally Great Britain, was there was intense interest in this.
They weren't competing for a theoretical prize that was of no value,
they were competing for an intensely practical problems. Longitude
had real meaning, as the real disaster in 22 October, in 1707, off of
Sicily show. Their were 1400 Mariners who lost their lives. Now
realize that in 1707 roughly, an I mean very roughly because
different experts quote different numbers on this, about 750 million
people had been born. As opposed to 7 billion.
So by one
estimate, there are nine times as many people on the globe. Think
about disaster larger than 9/11, or Pearl Harbor. Think about the
disaster as large as the rape of Nanjing. There are disasters worse,
but until this moment, you probably haven't heard of 1707 before.
Where has you have heard of several disasters much smaller in scale.
As with 9/11, four ships were lost. There is no accurate count of the
dead, estimates range between 1400, and 2000. but adjusted for the
time, that is larger than any year disaster, any fleet disaster, and
only assumes it's appropriate scale among the massacres of the time.
And as I said, you probably haven't heard of it until this moment.
That was the
terror of longitude. It would wipe clean, by the wrath of God, said
Raiders of Lost Ark, an entire fleet. Thus it was mandatory that a
prize be awarded to finding out what latitude the ships have, because
that was what people understood was the problem. It wasn't the real
problem from a relational database management, it was the problem as
they understood it. They began to work on the longitudinal problem,
as they understood it. And that meant breaking out how far from a
line fixed in space a ship was.
There were two
routes to go, one was a Galileo route, that is of tracking the moons
of Jupiter, and figuring out where they were. The other method was to
calculate and internal distance of latitude, and compared with what
would be known were they standing on the prime Meridian. This
actually involves two calculations. One is how far east or west you
are, and the other one is our you along the Prime Meridian, or along
the reverse side. Because remember there are two lines drawn, one is
the Prime Meridian, and the other one could be said to be the
Counterprime Meridian.
These two
calculations are not easy, and people as only that there calculation
be good enough. As we know from time, good enough means not really
good enough. If you don't think that this is important today, think
about the disaster which engulfed MH370, who was lost by a different
means, but the same ends. It to was lost by a line of longitude.
Ignore such things as the US Army did it, and look at the details. It
slipped off the radar, and cruised for eight hours. Most of the time
everyone was dead. In other words, the problem of longitude has been
not been solved, it is solved well enough for current purposes.
What people wanted
him to 17th and 18^{th} centuries was to find the location
of a very slow moving ship. And they want to know where the shoals
were, that was good enough for them. Thus they didn't want to know
enough to realize that longitudinal problem is also the card
problem. Though they worked on both problems, they did not
understand that they were the same.
So through the
1700s people worked on the two solutions to longitudinal problem:
and they came up with solutions to both. For fixed calculations on
land, the way to go was to calculate the moons, because moons are
fixed and you can go over the calculations and tell the are correct.
On the sea, however, you only have one chance, and you had best
make it count. In that form, you place a great deal of faith in
the calculations, rather than the siting of moons, because you
only have an instant to do the siding, and many hours to do the
calculations. In other words, though it seems there is one problem,
there are two roads to go, and each one of them has a different
solution. If you have plenty of time to the calculations, but not
much time to cite  you quickly find the way to cite quickly and to
the calculations. Where as if you have plenty of time to cite, then
oftentimes you will carefully cite. And this is what happened here:
if you have only one moment to get right, you take a very quick
citation, and work out the details. This is what John Harrison
did. While he had some help, it was his vision that made a
timepiece which was sufficient alone to do the work.

On the other side
of the problem, this is glicth #2. that being of chance and cards, a man by the name
of Blaise Pascal realized that chance was only the result of a
theoretical hand, and that all hands were different in the exact
same degree. It is humans that want particular hands, in a
particular order. And thus he described Pascal triangle. Of course
it had been studying before, but Pascal noted that they were
binomial coefficients of Pascal's rule, which is expanded to
ndimensions by Pascal's simplex.
What Pascale was
not the first person to realized was that every hand was derived
from the two numbers above it. This was very old, Pingala, or one
of his disciples, knew in the second century BC. What he did
realize was that the properties of several sets is contained
within the triangle. This leads to other places that we do not have
time to discuss, such as Sierpinski triangle, or a grid of
knights moving on a Plinko game board. What we are interested in
is how random becomes order, because we're interested in a
relational database management system, which seeks order rather
than randomness.
Pascal realized
that he could do calculations, and proceeded to show that a Pascal
calculator could do important work. For example he showed that
addition did not mean the calculator could do multiplication, which
is later to be shown to be important. But what was regarded as
important was his work with Pierre de Fermat on probability theory,
and is refutation of Aristotle's dictum that nature abhors a vacuum.
Now if I were
gazing at Pascal, I would have no trouble in talking about the
amazing things that he did. But I'm not. Instead, I am going to
talk about what is missing. And one thing that is missing is
Pascaline is a demonstration that multiplication is not simply
repeat subtraction. It comes close to this, but though the
principal is there, no one, Not even Pascal, notices it. But
someone will notice it and form the correct conclusion. That is, he
will notice that addition and subtraction, without multiplication,
are different. Addition and subtraction without multiplication are
simple, multiplication is complex. That addition is not the same
as subtraction is difficult to understand, and in time I will have
to explain.
As for Pascal,
he was dying, and knew this: saying “Sickness is the natural
state of Christians.” and disorder is a natural state of orderly
things. He died at only 39.
It may seem that
I am making relational database management complex. On the contrary,
humans made relational database management complex, because they
didn't understand just what they were up against. So things are
seemingly complex, because they didn't know that there was anything
to solve. Their were myriad of problems which would be solved,
without realizing that many of the pieces were actually the same.
They had been glimpses, and no more than that. Thus they were happy
with prizes to find longitude, and shown that randomness was in fact
ordered. But they did not realize they were on the wider horizon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)