| |
About Us: Statement of Our Mission
|
|
|
Our mission is to expose a huge error in a seed (very basic or root) axiomatic assumption, by helping software researchers/experts discover real-software-components for achieving real-CBD for software products. The Error: The scientists and researchers of computer science have been working very hard to advance our beloved field of software engineering since late 1960s, by relying on a huge erroneous axiomatic assumption that, software-components are nothing but certain ‘kinds of software parts', where the software parts belong to each kind are defined by either having given useful properties (e.g. reusable, standardized) or conforming to a given so called component model.
|
| |
|
The noble goal of this website is to help software researchers discover accurate answers to the two extremely important questions in the "preamble at the top of the WebPages" (in the context of the physical components and CBD of physical products). These discoveries not only expose errors in the seed postulations that derailed software engineering progress, but also help invent real software components & real CBSD (for putting software engineering research back on to right track).
|
|
|
The basic sciences evolved for centuries by assuming that “the Earth is at center”. This error sidetracked the scientific progress, and sciences ended up in a crisis (e.g. altered reality comprising myths). Discovering the truth (i.e. the Sun is at the center) exposed the flaw and resulted is greatest scientific revolution by putting the scientific progress on the right tracks. Existing software engineering paradigm has been evolving for decades by relying flawed assumptions such as flawed definitions for so called software components and so called CBSE. This error resulted in sidetracking the progress of computer science, and software engineering ended up in a crisis (i.e. altered reality).
|
| |
|
Discovering the truth (i.e. factual answers to the questions in the preamble at the top of this website) not only exposes the flaw but also leads to software engineering revolution by putting the progress of computer science on right tracks (based on reality, facts and reason). Please kindly keep in mind that we are only requesting fellow researchers to learn all the objective facts and valid observations related to the physical components and the CBD of physical products to come to own conclusions by objectively analyzing all the facts and observations.
|
|
| |
Pursuit of the absolute truths (or facts) is the sacred duty or responsibility shared by all the real scientists and researchers. We are not asking any one to believe us. We are humbly requesting each to not forget his/her sacred duty of discovering truths by objectively analyzing all known facts and valid observations (most of which are listed and summarized in our website to assist in discovering truths).
|
|
|
| |
|
The computer science and software engineering researchers made a huge error, because they have been trying to invent software components (by relying subjective concepts) without any basis in reality (i.e. many conclusions are often in contradiction with known facts) by ignoring every known fact & valid observation related to the physical components/CBD. It is a huge error to rely on such baseless subjective concepts and presumptions when it is possible to discover objective facts.
|
| |
|
The software engineering is a real engineering and computer science is a real science based on sound mathematical reasoning and logic, which cannot be built on unsubstantiated faith and myths. Unfortunately many experts refuse to substantiate their statements, except insisting that it is undisputed widely accepted faith (e.g. axiomatic concept or assumption). For example, many researchers of software engineering and scientists of computer science use many baseless excuses to defend/justify axiomatic faiths introduced in 1960s based on primeval instincts and are continue perusing this fools errand (e.g. to advance CBSD). Sample baseless excuses include:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Excuse-2: It is impossible to invent software components equivalent to physical components
|
|
|
How can any real scientists or researcher come to such baseless conclusion without ever trying to discover accurate description (e.g. set of essential characteristics or unique-properties) of the physical components?
Many researcher refuse to even consider such possibility.
|
|
|
The set off essential characteristics comprises one or more essential properties that are uniquely and universally shared by each and every physical component. The objective for discovering the unique properties (or hidden-nature) are (a) one must be able to unambiguously identify each component and (b) one must be able to unambiguously differentiate any other being (e.g. a thing or part) form the components (i.e. if and only if the being is not a component).
|
|
|
|
| Excuse-3: It is impossible to discover accurate description of the physical components
|
|
|
It is an absolute lie. How can any real scientist or researcher come to such conclusion without any basis and never even trying to discover the accurate description (e.g. universally shared unique essential properties or nature)? Whoever stubbornly stick to this kind of baseless excuses for defending existing paradox having obvious contradictions must be ashamed of oneself for believing that he/she is a real scientist/researcher (by ignoring even very basic scientific principles),
|
|
|
|
We respectfully challenge any researcher to prove any such excuse. Absence of any proof for such excuses, existing definitions for
software components
(having no basis in reality) are no more than fiction (e.g. wishful
thinking made out of thin air), and stupider than the dark age's assumption ‘the Earth is
static’. It is much easier to understand, in the dark ages why mankind believed that ‘the Earth is static’:
not only they but also many generations before them lived on the Earth and found no reason to believe that the Earth is moving.
The complex reality was not in plain sight, so needed inventing
telescope and many decades to meticulously observe and analyze facts to
accept Truth.
|
|
|
On the other hand, it is hard to believe, why respected scientists (even in the 21st century) using such silly excuses and refusing to validate the assumptions made in the 1960s (early dark ages of software) by analyzing the reality/facts about the physical components and CBD of physical products. Many experts justify
this kind of fiction, as if they never seen facts/reality about physical
components/CBD.
This simple reality is in our plain sight to observe/analyze facts to discover
Truth.
|
|
|
After all the large physical functional components are not invisible particles (to propose string theory) or
CBD is not origins of universe happened billions of years ago (to propose big bank theory) do decipher hidden secretes.
One must be ashamed for ignoring or not knowing one of the fundamental rules of basic sciences (i.e. physics, chemistry or biology), which is: There exists an accurate description for each and every physical being or physical phenomenon, where the accurate description comprises objective facts to answer/explain various aspects (related to the physical being). Therefore, it is most certainly possible to discover such description for each and every physical being or phenomenon, if it is possible to find each and every necessary pieces of information and all the basic facts related to the physical being or phenomenon.
|
|
|
For example, every real scientist and researcher knows (as a matter of fact) that there exists an accurate description for subatomic particles (e.g. electrons, protons or neutrons). But it is not possible to find many of the essential pieces of information and basic facts (e.g. effects of internal mechanisms) relating to the particles by using the technologies and scientific knowledge exist today.
|
|
|
Hence the researchers have no choice but to find and explore various ways for discovering essential pieces of information and objective facts by proposing subjective theories such as String-theory (or Big-bang-theory to discovery the origins of the Universe). Any real scientist uses such subjective concepts or theories only as a promising way to discover objective facts (i.e. only when it is not possible to find many of the essential pieces of information and facts by using the technologies and scientific knowledge exist at the time). But real scientists must never confuse between such subjective concepts (or theories) and the objective facts (i.e. discoveries of truths).
|
|
|
Unfortunately software researchers concluded that such subjective concepts are either inventions or facts. For example, isn't it an error to define certain kinds of software parts (having given useful properties) are components and defining CBSD/CBSE is using such fake components. Any real scientist agrees that it is only a faith that the string-theory is the most promising way for discovering the facts. But unfortunately, today even irrefutable facts and rational reasoning cannot make many software researchers accept errors in widely accepted so called facts (i.e. faith).
|
|
|
Today it is possible to find each and every piece of information and fact for discovering accurate descriptions for the physical components and CBD of physical products. In fact, we can find enough facts/valid-observations to re-confirm the descriptions/discoveries in multiple ways.
|
|
|
It is impossible to find any evidence that, any one else ever even tried to substantiate such baseless justifications and excuses. The objective is to prove that it is possible to find accurate answers to the two essential questions in the ‘preamble’ at the top of this website.
|
|
|
Our only request is kindly discover the facts & accurate answers (even if the conclusions are different from our conclusions). If your conclusions are correct (or better), you get (or share) credit for discovering real software components. Isn't it how the real scientific process must be?
|
|
Discovering the Truths shall usher in a revolution in software engineering
|
|
|
In the early years of any 'scientific discipline' or 'scientific field' (e.g. computer science or physics), or when the scientific field is in its infancy, the early practitioners and researchers of the field have no choice but to make many educated assumptions (based on best available collective wisdom and technologies at that time). Of course, chances are there might be few errors in such seed postulations (i.e. in the educated assumptions or axioms). Most of the errors likely will be detected as the scientific field makes study progress. But unfortunately an error might go undetected (e.g. descriptions for software components) for decades, or even centuries (e.g. geocentric model for physics), resulting in driving the field in to a crisis.
|
|
|
We all know that, at any time since 1970, tens of thousands of scientists, researchers, experts and practitioners have been passionately working very hard (e.g. often applying brute force) to advance the software engineering for decades. But unfortunately they have been applying the brute force by ignoring to validate the seed postulations (i.e. erroneous assumptions made in 1960s, when software engineering was still in its infancy). This brute force resulted in creating a complex paradigm comprising an ecosystem of thousands of interdependent widely accepted concepts and acclaimed works or inventions, which are used today to deny the existence of an error and to justify numerous contradictions (e.g. that are otherwise obvious epicycles and retrograde motions).
|
|
|
Today any expert could choose form thousands of seminal research papers and widely acclaimed concepts to not only defend the erroneous postulations but also discredit our discoveries (e.g. by denying any possibility of such error). Of course, many experts in fact are doing that, without even realizing that they are using invalid circular logic.
Unfortunately all the brute force of research community only creating more and more epicycles that can be used to defined the errors (e.g. the geocentric model of computer science), which only makes our task more & more complex.
|
|
|
The objective of this website is to provide conclusive proof that there are errors in the seed postulations. Until these errors are exposed and properly addressed, no meaningful advancement in our field (i.e. software engineering) shall be possible (e.g. by wasting most of the hard work).
|
|
|
Exposing errors in the seed postulations will channel the brute force (i.e. the hard work and passion) in the right directing, which shall result in rapid advancement of the software engineering. We are now fighting loosing battles, so far, hoping these early failures help us learn valuable lessons to overcome irrational skepticism for eventual success, which shall lead to a Kuhnian paradigm shift and a scientific revolution in our beloved computer science & software engineering.
|
| |
|
The software engineering must be based on facts and reason, but today it has so many concepts based on baseless assumptions and myths. We are determined to expose the errors for putting the software engineering on right track for making real progress based on facts and reason.
|
|
|
|
A fair and full disclosure statement on our noble goals and not so noble but ethical motives
|
| |
