Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!gatech!hubcap!fpst
From: fpst@hubcap.UUCP (Steve Stevenson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Amdahl's Law
Message-ID: <483@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Sep-87 08:40:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: hubcap.483
Posted: Mon Sep 21 08:40:10 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 22-Sep-87 02:59:26 EDT
References: <11370002@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 11

in article <11370002@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>, swh@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (Steve Harrold) says:
> If there is some dispute as to how accurate Amdahl's "Law" is, shouldn't
> it be more properly labelled "Amdahl's Theorem"??

Properly, it isn't a theorem unless done with some axioms, etc.  How
about "conjecture" or "thesis."
-- 
Steve Stevenson                            fpst@hubcap.clemson.edu
(aka D. E. Stevenson),                     fpst@clemson.csnet
Department of Computer Science,            comp.hypercube
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906 (803)656-5880.mabell