From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Fri Nov 17 11:53:28 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_2_1); 17 Nov 2000 19:53:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 75756 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2000 19:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Nov 2000 19:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 17 Nov 2000 19:53:24 -0000 Received: from calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA16515 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:56:34 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200011171956.OAA16515@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: except the cat In-Reply-To: Message from "=?iso-8859-1?q?Alfred_W._Tueting_(T=FCting)?=" of "Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:16:41 GMT." <8v3p5p+9h33@eGroups.com> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:56:33 -0500 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell "=?iso-8859-1?q?Alfred_W._Tueting_(T=FCting)?=" writes: >--- In lojban@egroups.com, Pierre Abbat wrote: >> Finally figured it out: >> >> roda ku'anai le mlatu > >I'm not at all sure about that: >1) {ku'a} needs arguments of type "set" - "le mlatu" isn't a set, nor >is "roda" So use le'i. >2) {ku'a} designates the "intersection" of different sets: how can >"roda" have an intersection with "another" set, since *including* >all types of sets? I don't think you're clear on what intersection is. The intersection of the total set ("roda") and any other set A is just the set A. The point is merely emphasis. >3) What has {ku'anai} the power to express just by negating an >intersection? A friend asked that question said he would expect it to return all the points where the two sets are not equal, which is _exactly_ the desired result. IOW, a set XOR. I think that it's a _WONDERFULLY_ elegant solution. Unfortunately, this is _NOT_ the interpretation of nai for non logical connectives specified by the book: The following ``nai'', if present, does not negate either of the things to be connected, but instead specifies that some other connection (logical or non-logical) is applicable: it is a scalar negation: This is _VERY_BAD_, because it means that lojabn _does_not_ have a complete set of set operators. Union, intersection, and cartesion product are not enough, difference is required. In porticular, there is _on_way_ to perform a set XOR with solely those three operations. You need either a difference operator or a complement operator, which is what I was treating the nai as. Perhaps "le'i mlatu nai" could be treated as the complement of the set containing the cat? -Robin -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. Despite not getting very emotional about it, the fact that quantum entanglement doesn't allow transmission of information is probably the most profound dissapointment I've ever experienced. -- RLPowell