Re: Relation subset operators

From: paul c <>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:56:38 GMT
Message-ID: <WkwWl.29664$Db2.26421_at_edtnps83> wrote:
> Absurd is not necessarily crazy(fou).
> Actually I do respect *absurd* reasonning as a mathematical tool (if
> you can't prove something is right try to prove that the opposite is
> wrong)...I just don't believe that a science that does even yet have
> consensus about how universal quantifiers are defined should even go
> there. Not for a second. In French: Ne pas mettre la charrue avant
> les boeufs.

Just curious, since everybody seems to be in such a good mood, is there a French word for (logically) 'true', other than 'vrai'?, eg., true in some formal logic sense.

(If English had no such word, limited, say, to 'real', there'd be no stopping the mystics. Then there is 'faux' which I gather often stands for artificial. I often think neither language has the exact right words and think that would put any sensible person in a mood to think that the relational 'modal' wouldn't be precisely expressible in either one.)

This all reminds me that I've never tried to follow through Codd's reduction algorithm nor the later corrections (ie., the equivalence between the calculus and the algebra might be a way to constrain the possible interpretations of each individuallly and so avoid the spoken language problems . Does anybody know of a free online source for either? Received on Sat Jun 06 2009 - 17:56:38 CEST

Original text of this message