Subject: Re: [lojban] zgamuvjga

From: Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:55:03 -0600 (MDT)

On Thu, 16 May 2002, Ted Reed wrote:

> > > 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.)
>
> What about a set of observation points? It's difficult to move between two
> points instantaneously.

Please recall that you can insert a route into any bridi with the modal
"veka'a".

Just because you can't move between two points instantly doesn't mean that
the path you took between two parallax observations is something you need
to tell people about. It certainly isn't used in any relevent
calculations.

Given that the route can easily be inserted by a modal, and the fact that
it is basically irrelevent to any realistic discussion of parallax, there
is no need to force it into the meaning.

And it would certainly be _wrong_wrong_wrong_ to consider discarding the
start and end points, as those are the whole point of parallax in
scientific measurement.

- Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose