From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun May 25 08:44:21 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 25 May 2008 08:44:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K0IOT-0003Ks-2H for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 25 May 2008 08:44:21 -0700 Received: from narnia.blumen-schwarz.de ([80.190.195.21]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K0IOM-0003KH-Sk for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 25 May 2008 08:44:20 -0700 Received: from n5814.n.pppool.de ([89.50.88.20]) by narnia.blumen-schwarz.de with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1K0IO6-0002m1-1Z for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 25 May 2008 17:44:07 +0200 From: nam To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Assertions of time-relations and precision of abstractions Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 17:45:02 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5033593.qQG6yfJITf"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200805251745.08367.eldrikdo@gmail.com> X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: ------------- Start der SpamAssassin Auswertung --------------- Bei Fragen dazu bitte das Forum life.d.cvmx verwenden! Details der Inhaltsanalyse: (-1.9 Punkte, 5.0 benoetigt) -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Nachricht wurde nur über vertrauenswürdige Rechner weitergeleitet 2.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Spamwahrscheinlichkeit nach Bayes-Test: 40-60% [score: 0.5000] -2.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list ---------------- Ende der SpamAssassin Auswertung ----------------- X-Spam-Score: 1.2 X-Spam-Score-Int: 12 X-Spam-Bar: + X-archive-position: 14432 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: eldrikdo@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --nextPart5033593.qQG6yfJITf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline =2Ecoi rodo We've had a long discussion on this on IRC, but in the end I got the=20 impression we were all more or less confused: 1.) Does {lo nu lo cevni cu zbasu lo munji kei fasnu} assert {lo cevni cu zbasu= lo=20 munji} to be true? Or does the abstraction loose precision (in whatever way)?. (We had the point that {lo nu lo cevni cu zbasu lo munji kei} could also re= fer=20 to the big-bang due to it's abstract nature (while {lo cevni cu zbasu lo=20 munji} can't due to it's less abstract nature); does the abstraction really= =20 loose precision?) 2.) Which of the following is asserted by {.i broda ba lo nu brode}? A.) {.i broda} B.) {.i brode} C.) {.i lo nu broda cu balvi lo nu brode} [Just the order! Without=20 implications of A and B!] We had the example of: {.i mi citka lo plise ba lo nu mi citka lo badna} Where the question was, if {.i mi citka lo badna} was implicitly stated, si= nce=20 the whole bridi wouldn't make sense if it wasn't. (i.e. It wouldn't make sense to state "I eat one or more apples after my=20 eating one or more banana(s)", if "my eating one or more banana(s)" never=20 occurred and never will) ki'e mi'e nam --nextPart5033593.qQG6yfJITf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIOYmEvcZo9JB6OPURAr6PAJ9nlT4DG48bS2yF5qOfLNjLro1ogwCfc0Xm weAQuh5lhgGPw3O/UYWJzbM= =mtus -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5033593.qQG6yfJITf-- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.