From sentto-44114-18095-1040467370-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sat Dec 21 02:43:27 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 21 Dec 2002 02:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.65]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Ph6J-0000dL-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 02:43:23 -0800 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-18095-1040467370-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.201] by n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Dec 2002 10:42:52 -0000 X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 21 Dec 2002 10:42:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 5156 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 10:42:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 21 Dec 2002 10:42:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao02.cox.net) (68.1.17.243) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 10:42:51 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20021221104250.HGHK2203.lakemtao02.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 05:42:50 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021221053542.033510f0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com In-Reply-To: <0212202008210F.17068@neofelis> References: From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 05:38:08 -0500 Subject: [lojban] Re: Lemma and conjecture Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3607 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list At 08:08 PM 12/20/02 -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote: >On Thursday 19 December 2002 18:17, Jorge Llambias wrote: > > (Is the conjecture at all related to the lemma?) > >Only in that both are part of proving the valfendi algorithm. > > > I'm not sure what the status of {ke'unsazri} or {ke'upsazri} is. > > Are they valid fu'ivla, because they can't be lujvo, or are they > > not valid fu'ivla, because there are possible lujvo of the form > > CVVC/CVCCV? If they are valid fu'ivla, then I can't see how the > > conjecture could possibly be false. If they are not valid fu'ivla, > > then obviously the conjecture is false. > >AFAIK they are valid fu'ivla, because they can't be lujvo. There are more rules limiting fu'ivla than that. Indeed for Type IV fu'ivla, there are (probably) more rules limiting them than have been identified. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/