From sentto-44114-2119-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Wed Mar 01 20:54:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 26112 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2000 20:54:10 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2000 20:54:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 24603 invoked by uid 40001); 1 Mar 2000 20:57:42 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 24600 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2000 20:57:40 -0000 Received: from hm.egroups.com (208.48.218.15) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2000 20:57:40 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-2119-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.35] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Mar 2000 20:57:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 8309 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2000 20:57:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2000 20:57:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.reutershealth.com) (204.243.9.36) by mta1.onelist.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2000 20:57:23 -0000 Received: from reutershealth.com (IDENT:cowan@skunk.reutershealth.com [204.243.9.153]) by mail.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA13944 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:57:20 -0500 (EST) Sender: cowan@mail.reutershealth.com Message-ID: <38BD843C.A7D5D752@reutershealth.com> Organization: Reuters Health Information X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en To: "lojban@onelist.com" References: <20000301202400.38246.qmail@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 15:57:32 -0500 X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan Subject: Re: [lojban] Sets etc. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: John Cowan Jorge Llambias wrote: > But is there any reason why masses cannot have a most important > member? Sets can be sliced into members in only one way: masses, in many different ways. > I'll give it a shot. Let's use {girzu} for "club", and > {mulgirzu} for "final club". This should work: > > ca'e ro da poi girzu cu mulgirzu > I define: Every club is a final club. > > I think that is the only way that what you called a > definition can really define final clubs. This definition is too inclusive. Here's an example. Membership in Club A does not preclude membership in any club. Membership in Club B precludes membership in every other club. Membership in Club C precludes membership in Club D. Membership in Club D precludes membership in Club A. Membership in Club E precludes membership in Clubs A and C. There are no other clubs. Then: Club B is trivially final. Club A cannot be final because it is compatible with all other clubs. Club C is incompatible with every other club but A, so it is final. Club D is incompatible with A, B, and C, but not E, so it is final if E is not final. The same applies to Club E, mutatis mutandis. Therefore neither D nor E is final. His visits are occasional to the 'Senior Educational' For it is against the rules For any one Cat to belong to both that And the 'Joint Superior Schools'." --T. S. Eliot -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/915/1/_/17627/_/951944249/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com