From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue May 27 07:21:46 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 27 May 2008 18:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K103e-0003GL-FF for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 07:21:46 -0700 Received: from narnia.blumen-schwarz.de ([80.190.195.21]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K103V-0003FY-Vn for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 07:21:46 -0700 Received: from n5820.n.pppool.de ([89.50.88.32]) by narnia.blumen-schwarz.de with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1K103L-0003sg-F1 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 16:21:30 +0200 From: Roman Naumann To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Assertions of time-relations and precision of abstractions User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <200805251745.08367.eldrikdo@gmail.com> <96f789a60805260917l7c06c303g13ae6954092eb26f@mail.gmail.com> <200805271431.41314.eldrikdo@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200805271431.41314.eldrikdo@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 16:22:46 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200805271623.00465.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> X-Spam_score: -5.3 X-Spam_score_int: -52 X-Spam_bar: ----- X-Spam_report: ------------- Start der SpamAssassin Auswertung --------------- Bei Fragen dazu bitte das Forum life.d.cvmx verwenden! Details der Inhaltsanalyse: (-5.3 Punkte, 5.0 benoetigt) -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Nachricht wurde nur über vertrauenswürdige Rechner weitergeleitet -4.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Spamwahrscheinlichkeit nach Bayes-Test: 0-1% [score: 0.0000] 0.5 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: 14443 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: roman_naumann@fastmail.fm Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Am Dienstag 27 Mai 2008 14:31:36 schrieb nam: > So, would it be valid so sum up: If {.i broda ba lo nu brode} is given, > {broda} happens iff {brode} happens? (I did not receive this email from the mailserver and thus assume it hasn't been sent the first time due to an error) Sry, that's plain wrong. Don't konw what I was thinking about.. What I wanted to ask is: Would it be fine to say: Given: {.i broda ba lo nu brode} Then: {.i broda .inaja brode} (This doesn't deny 'when hell frezes' [brode], because if NOT brode then NOT broda) => (If hell never freezes, I'll never eat the banana or whatever) 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.