Pascal De Laet

I already knew the connection between the "Actor model" and the "closure" concept (from the very classic paper "Lambda the ultimate" at http://repository.readscheme.org/ftp/papers/ai-lab-pubs/AIM-379.pdf)
Today I discovered a link between "Actor model" and physics ("According to Carl Hewitt, unlike previous models of computation, the Actor model was inspired by physics including general relativity and quantum mechanics" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor_model)
I regret that a physicist was not present to ask something "I wanted to know (but too afraid to ask)".
Where was Brian Beckman ?

Pascal

The "idempotence of IDisposable" remark of Erik is very interesting.

Is the idempotence of Idisposable object linked with the monadic nature of LINQ ?

(I think that "every LINQ objects are Idisposable" and "all Monad are monoïds").

Can be LINQ presented like a "sophisticated method to recycle objects" !

Remark that all communication protocols (like TCP/IP) can also be presented like that
(the more complicated aspect is to "recycle" IO buffers without loosing data).

I suspect that the "key" of the Beckman category is in the physical domain.

At first sight, the properties of this category seem similar to the Wave/Particle duality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave–particle_duality)

The key => particles are "enumerable" and waves are "observable".

Both domains (the Schrodinger domain for particle and Maxwell for waves) are using the "curl" operator but in a dual (and not compatible) way.

In the physical domain

The only things what we know on a (long living) particle is his space-coordinate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_of_indiscernibles and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indistinguishable_particles) =>

coordinization (first sense) = "position enumeration"

In the "wave domain" the referential are transparent (time relative) => the wave doesn't have a local position-state but only a timing (for wave events such wave absorption and wave emission).


In the computer domain

=> the root observer is the type "T" (the basic observation = computer clock = now and everywhere)
(composing observers = dividing the clock)

=> the root enumerator is the type "P" (the basic enumeration = here and every time)
(composing enumerator = filling the memory)

The flight path permits to convert "locally" the type T and P and F (but not globally)

Brian,

Can you satisfy my curiosity on this point ?

Can I supose that programming without Monad(s) is like using a "flat space"  (in your universe) ?

(The deal with "the gravitation and the relativity theory" seems like the  deal with "an effect/Rx system and a pure functional programming style").

???

Pascal