From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:03:31 2002
Return-Path: <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 22 Sep 2002 06:03:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 40934 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2002 06:03:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Sep 2002 06:03:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.101)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Sep 2002 06:03:31 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
  Sat, 21 Sep 2002 23:03:31 -0700
Received: from 200.69.6.24 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
  Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:03:30 GMT
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Bcc: 
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Sets and classes
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:03:30 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F1013cew8k69RKLpgTF000014cc@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Sep 2002 06:03:31.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[C7030800:01C261FD]
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [200.69.6.24]
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566
X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000


la djorden cusku di'e

>Would
> lo ka'ejanaica'a selcmi be da
>satisfy as an empty set?

(I suppose you mean {jenai}.) I'm not sure whether a mathematician
would approve though. Mathematical things are supposed to just be.

>Anyway I'm not so sure about all this. It seems that it would be
>somewhat unfortunate if we can't say "le selcmi be noda", when
>there's a clear, useful interpretation of it (which I still don't
>think entails "na selcmi", only "na selcmi be da").

{le selcmi be noda} can be a good way to refer to the empty
set. Just as {le klama be noda} can be a good description for
one who stays at home, and {le patfu be noda} can be a good
description of someone who doesn't have children.

But that doesn't mean that {lo selcmi be noda} is a member of
{lo'i selcmi}, or that {lo klama be noda} is a member of
{lo'i klama}.

>Also (and back to the original thing), what about "lu'i no da" for
>empty set?

Yes, certainly. But saying {lu'i no da selcmi}, that is false,
unless you mean {lu'i no da selcmi zi'o}.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com


