oiro'a, indeed! I need to review the lujvo section...but for problem of naming
"vector", perhaps have it referenced to physics terms such as "force" and
"direction." however, since vectors occasionally have purely mathematical
purposes, even in number theory, this may not hold water.
Michael Tu
On Feb 19, 2008 11:28 AM, komfo,amonan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2008 10:12 AM, Michael Turniansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [...] "ka'orelcimdyna'u" is
> >
> > parsed as "ka'o relcimdyna'u", the sumti "an imaginary amount of
> > complex numbers".
>
> Rather, the nonsensical "
On 19/02/2008, Pierre Abbat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 01:25, Yoav Nir wrote:
> > I don't like that very much. a two-dimensional number should be a
> > vector, not a complex number. {lujna'u} I like better, because this is
> > a composite number, just as {lujvo} is a
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 01:25, Yoav Nir wrote:
> I don't like that very much. a two-dimensional number should be a
> vector, not a complex number. {lujna'u} I like better, because this is
> a composite number, just as {lujvo} is a composite word.
But a composite number is a product of more tha
On Feb 19, 2008 10:12 AM, Michael Turniansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] "ka'orelcimdyna'u" is
> parsed as "ka'o relcimdyna'u", the sumti "an imaginary amount of
> complex numbers".
Rather, the nonsensical "i complex numbers", where "i" is the quantifier.
[...] If you WANTED to add cma
On Feb 19, 2008 12:29 AM, Liam Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe that the lojban number system in lojban has a cmavo for imaginary
> number: perhaps by implementing it (ka'o) into the lujvo, it would be less
> ambiguous, because relcimdyna'u also could imply a square measure (i.e.,
> s
On Feb 18, 2008, at 3:28 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2008 15:43, David Cortesi wrote:
per jbovlaste, complex number is {lujna'u} i.e. {pluja namcu}, a
complicated type of number -- not pleasing to me, since it is more a
two-dimensional number than one that is {pluja}.
Someon
Sorry for my absence,
a "two-kind-of dimension-kind-of number" as a definition for "complex number"?
Perhaps it ought to capture some of it's peculiar multiplicative properties,
but then again, maybe not. lujna'u certainly is Not Apt, though, and is
malglico.
I believe that the lojb
