Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: should c be a subset of c++? |
| Date | 2015-11-18 09:11 -0800 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <lnoaerfd1i.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | (11 earlier) <n25u7b$1j2$1@speranza.aioe.org> <564ba6ac.25932250@news.xs4all.nl> <ad165bf0-7d7c-4af6-beaf-9e22322f6bf9@googlegroups.com> <lnziybh0ay.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <e84c14ad-9d11-4b42-a2d9-c505e1251449@googlegroups.com> |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
> On Wednesday, November 18, 2015 at 2:03:52 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
[...]
>> Are you *still* trying to argue that negative values are not physically
>> significant?
>>
> Let's say electrons and protons are in fact travelling like cars on a road down
> a space which is constricted in all dimensions but one. Then their sign would
> simply be the major vector.
> Occasionally, as on a real road, one might do an about turn. And so flip
> sign. Then it would collide in the space with another and you'd get a
> destructive event. But you'd hardly ever see that.
> I'm not saying this is how the system works, but no one here has suggested
> anything to show the contrary (I don't have freshman physics, there might be
> a very simple reason why we know the system can't work like that). So sign
> would be an illusion, an artefact of our instruments' limitations.
> What leads me to suggest this is that we can't assign "negative" or "positive".
There are real-world quantities for which both positive and negative
numbers make sense.
Do you *really* dispute that? Citing specific cases where that might
not be 100% accurate is not particularly useful. In any case, this is
not about C (unless you want to propose changes to the language to fit
your concept of physics).
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: should c be a subset of c++? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 19:06 -0500
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 00:41 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-11-07 10:01 -0500
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 09:12 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-07 11:58 -0600
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 10:25 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-07 11:54 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 14:22 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 13:05 -0600
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 11:39 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-11-13 13:20 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 16:36 -0500
Re: should c be a subset of c++? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-14 00:03 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-11-13 17:06 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-11-13 13:29 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 12:57 -0600
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 11:37 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-08 17:16 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-08 18:19 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 23:25 -0600
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 22:34 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-13 22:18 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-14 00:11 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-17 22:16 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-17 21:09 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-18 05:22 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-18 06:03 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-18 08:44 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-18 09:11 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-18 09:54 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-24 01:49 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-24 02:58 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-24 11:58 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-24 09:09 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-25 00:12 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-25 12:35 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-27 16:30 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-19 10:37 +0000
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-20 15:40 -0800
Re: should c be a subset of c++? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 22:20 +0000
csiph-web