Message-Id: <m0sOYU5-0000YjC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Wed, 21 Jun 1995 18:43:15 EDT
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: mass again
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1468
Lines: 35

> lo junta be loi remna cu ki'ogra li xa .a li vonono,ki'o,ki'o .a li tu'o
> A weight of the mass of humanity is in kilograms "6" or "400,000,000" or
>                                         "almost any number you choose".

You are claiming that at least one of those is true, which is a weaker
claim than what you mean, I think.

Using {e}'s instead of {a}'s would not help, because in that case you'd
be saying that there is at least one weight that is each and every one
of those numbers, but you don't want that.

I think that what you meant to say is:

li xa e li vononoki'oki'o e li tu'o cu se ki'ogra lo junta be loi remna

and I totally agree with the statement, though I read it slightly
differently than you. "A weight of some mass of humanity", rather than
"of the mass of humanity".

> because the default for "loi remna" is that it is the contextually
> appropropriate non-0 portion of the mass (i.e. pisu'o), and there is no
> context to constrain how much of the mass is being discussed.

You are taking {loi remna} as definite. I think it isn't definite,
just like {lo remna}.

> lo junta be piro loi remna cu ki'ogra li so'a
> A weight of all of the mass of humanity is in kilograms a
>                                         (specific) very large number.

{li so'a} is a bit too much, I think. There are numbers very much larger
than the weight of humanity in kilograms. The earth, for example, would
weigh much more. I would say {li so'i}.

Jorge