From - Tue Feb 20 14:57:23 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id FAA15701 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 05:29:29 -0500 Message-Id: <199602141029.FAA15701@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 35B43B0A ; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 4:56:05 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 04:54:14 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: PLI: gismu for X-To: topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 886 >.i mi na djuno .iku'i ba'anai lo kantu na ka'e se fendi >.i mi selsau lo'e kantu be lo'e nejni .e lo'e kantu be lo'e datni .e lo'e >kantu be lo'e canlu joi temci .e nope'ida poi drata > >(I dunno, but I, like, remember quantum units to be indivisible. >I know about quantum units of energy, data, and space/time, and >no other, I think.) Agreed, but for example, in Guttman scales, if I understand them, one is agreeing on a fixed and specific number of indivisible subcategories to divide the possibilities into, and something falls into exactly one of the categories. Then you get ordered sets of categories in another scale, but they are still indivisiable. And then in the extreme you get continuous scales, which have an infinite number of indivisible subcategoriues. And I of course am talking like I actually know something, which I do not %^) lojbab