Re: Relational lattice completeness

From: vc <boston103_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 7 Apr 2006 14:25:21 -0700
Message-ID: <1144445121.162471.184100@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Mikito Harakiri wrote:
> vc wrote:
> >
> > What do you mean by metamathematics ?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamathematics

How is the link relevant to theory completeness ?

>
> > >How about "extraordinary relations"?
> >
> > What about them ?
>
> They are introduced in the link supplied.

I wonder why you think the article is interesting. What important insight does it offer ?

>
> > > http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/hehner97relational.html
>
> Tarski relation algebra appears not to have the union operator. Perhaps
> this may explain why the emphasis is on the relational division and
> "rational" aka "extraordinary" relations. One part which seems
> obviously missing is the introduction of negative relations. The
> equation with union operator
>
> P \/ X = Q
>
> has solutions only if P <= Q. Unlike equations in integers there has to
> be a second equation that would guarantee uniqueness of the solution
>
> P \/ X = Q
> P /\ X = 01
>
> ...
Received on Fri Apr 07 2006 - 16:25:21 CDT