From xod@thestonecutters.net Thu May 16 08:06:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_2); 16 May 2002 15:06:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 16691 invoked from network); 16 May 2002 15:06:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 May 2002 15:06:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO granite.thestonecutters.net) (66.111.194.10) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 May 2002 15:06:53 -0000 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g4GF6jj44576 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 11:06:45 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:06:45 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] zgamuvjga In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020516105910.I44426-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Thu, 16 May 2002, Jay Kominek wrote: > > On Tue, 14 May 2002, Ted Reed wrote: > > > On Tuesday 14 May 2002 22:20, you wrote: > > > I made this word up for "parallax" with the following place structure: > > > x1 is the parallax of x2 as seen by x3 who moves to x4 from x5 > > > Someone proposed the following place structure, if I understand the comment > > > right: > > > x1 is the parallax of x2 as seen by x3 who moves along path x4 > > > Which is better? > > > > I think knowing the whole path is more important than just the starting and > > ending points. > > Only the two observation points are relevent. The path does not have any > affect on the total shift observed. (Nor can it.) ku'i fancu le zu'o muvdu gi'enai do'e se linji kei le li'i zgamugjga fi ce'u