# Re: Can relational alegbra perform bulk operations?

From: Tegiri Nenashi <tegirinenashi_at_gmail.com>

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 10:03:11 -0700 (PDT)

Message-ID: <b1667dd5-689a-4b25-959e-40c525a8f664_at_v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 10:03:11 -0700 (PDT)

Message-ID: <b1667dd5-689a-4b25-959e-40c525a8f664_at_v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>

On Sep 30, 7:37 pm, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:

*> I would have thought that set theory itself cannot be regarded as an
*

> algebraic structure - because it is not possible to form the set of

> all sets (by Russell).

May I suggest that the problem is the set theory foundation -- the set membership operation? After all, one can't possibly think of the least pretty operation from algebraic perspective. Contrast it to intersection, union, and (relative) complement -- which form Boolean algebra on a powerset. Received on Thu Oct 01 2009 - 19:03:11 CEST