From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Sat Sep 21 17:40:10 2002
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 21 Sep 2002 17:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05)
	id 17sunA-0007vY-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 21 Sep 2002 17:40:08 -0700
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 17:40:08 -0700
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Sets and classes
Message-ID: <20020922004008.GM28894@digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <02092120101005.02144@neofelis>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <02092120101005.02144@neofelis>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 1449
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 08:10:10PM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> In mathematical usage, "class" is {klesi} (or maybe {zilkle} since x2
> is always sets) and "set" appears to be {selcmi}. But what of the
> empty set? {} selcmi noda, and {selcmi noda} is equivalent to {na
> selcmi}. So what is the word for "set"?

What makes you think that selcmi noda == na selcmi?  And what about lo
selcmi poi kunti?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/