From cowan@ccil.org Thu Jul 06 17:13:44 2000
Return-Path:
Received: (qmail 1704 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2000 00:13:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Jul 2000 00:13:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO locke.ccil.org) (192.190.237.102) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Jul 2000 00:13:43 -0000
Received: from localhost (cowan@localhost) by locke.ccil.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA01051; Thu, 6 Jul 2000 20:50:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 20:50:06 -0400 (EDT)
To: Thorild Selen
Cc: lojban
Subject: Re: [lojban] 2 maths questions
In-Reply-To: <200007062237.AAA27948@Zeke.Update.UU.SE>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-eGroups-From: John Cowan
From: John Cowan
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Thorild Selen wrote:
> Aren't you trying to make things a little too complicated here?
Actually, I probably wasn't making them complicated enough.
> What you really want to say is probably that the set of even
> numbers is a _proper subset_ of the set of integers, so there
> is certainly a well known name for this relation.
Yes, but it isn't quantifiable. I want to able to say that
the set of integers is twice as "thick" ("dense" is already used
for a different property) as the set of evens, and that the set
of evens is 500,000 times as "thick" as the set of multiples of
one million.
What I don't know is whether this notion of "thickness" can be
extrapolated beyond the sets which are multiples of some integer.
How "thick" is the set of primes relative to the set of integers,
for example?
--
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org
"You need a change: try Canada" "You need a change: try China"
--fortune cookies opened by a couple that I know