We strongly & emphatically disagree. Analysis assumes a homogeneous computational regime for the said “infinite” store otherwise it is basically meaningless. If this assumption is known not to hold (for example in considering the role of caching in algorithms), this is specifically incorporated in the analysis. See “cache models” and cache-oblivious algorithms for examples.
Cache-Oblivious Structures I, MIT, by Erik Demaine
None of this is true for basic O notation, it's just what exponent the algorithm carries on the number of elements.
Big-O notation doesn't even have to do with this article, it's just showing that memory access isn't strictly constant. This all seems like you're trying to argue something that isn't a part of this thread and I'm not sure what that is.
Why are you saying 'we' in your comment?
computational regime
I think you mean environment instead of regime.
the said “infinite” store
None of this is true for basic O notation, it's just what exponent the algorithm carries on the number of elements.
Big-O notation doesn't even have to do with this article, it's just showing that memory access isn't strictly constant. This all seems like you're trying to argue something that isn't a part of this thread and I'm not sure what that is.