LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for DATETIME Archives


DATETIME Archives

DATETIME Archives


DATETIME@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATETIME Home

DATETIME Home

DATETIME  November 2010

DATETIME November 2010

Subject:

Re: Types of uncertainty

From:

"Edward C. Zimmermann" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 25 Nov 2010 21:28:57 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (73 lines)

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:14:40 +0000, Simon Grant wrote
> On 25 November 2010 13:25, Jakob Voss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Fuzzy sets are not magic and they have proved to describe real-world
applications (which are based on natural language, which is fuzzy perse) much
better than strict sets. If you know exact values, fine. But in many cases you
only know an approximate value.
>

You don't really want to get into a discussion on fuzzy loigc . Its irrelevant
to our issues here.

> Is this a claim that fuzzy logic is academically uncontroversial?
>
> That would not get much support from, e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_logic where the word "controversial" is
pretty prominent.
>

What a horribly written piece!!! Complete rubbish!

Its starts off "remains controversial among most statisticians, who prefer
Bayesian logic," and goes downhill from there. The joke, of course, is that
Bayesians are, of course, the controversial lot among most statisticians!


> I disagree. Often it is very useful, e.g., to specify a mean and standard
deviation of a value sampled from a normal distribution.
>

Approx. in our model is not about probability. It can be if you want. It about
whatever you wish. But there are no degrees. Its either approx., equivalent
(equal) or not.
  
>
> Can anyone propose any generally acceptable distinction between
> an approximate value with no definite range, and a value that is
> questionable? At present I cannot imagine any pragmatic difference.

They are not the same. There are questionable dates--- not sure. And there are
approx. ones.. For example.. When did the Egyptian pharaoh Tutankhamun live?

Now we also have, following, the Torah a number of calculations for the date
of the Great Flood. Any of these are not approximate but questionable.

Chabad, for example, put the date of start of the Great Flood at
1656 since creation and, in their model, 2105 BCE. Others put it at 5000 BCE,
2304 BCE and a number of other dates.. Each calculated with a clear and well
developed methodology.. Going from Creation forward.. from Exodus backwards..
etc. etc.. These days--- save the +-1 year--- are questionable but not
approximate.

25th of December 3 BCE is generally given as the birthday for a Yehoshua ben
Yosef. That date is questionable. Its the accepted date but its also generally
accepted to be wrong. Among the followers of Christian faiths the year 2 BCE,
3 BCE, 4 BCE and 6 BCE and even 1 CE have their adherents and alongside 25
Dec. the 6th of April is a popular date. It is also not even accepted if such
a person ever existed-- whence can have no date of birth. Some consider the
figure to be a myth while others see multiple Yehoshuas within a number of
Messianic sects.


> A questionable value has a strict value, but this value may be wrong.

--

 Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
 Basis Systeme netzwerk, Munich Ges. des buergerl. Rechts
 Office Leo (R&D):
  Leopoldstrasse 53-55, D-80802 Munich,
  Federal Republic of Germany
 http://www.nonmonotonic.net
 Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2019
February 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
December 2014
November 2014
March 2014
September 2013
May 2013
February 2013
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
May 2012
March 2012
December 2011
November 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager