# Re: The seven step series

```  ----- Original Message -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:40 AM
Subject: Re: The seven step series```
```

Hi Kim, Marty, Johnathan, John, Mirek, and all...

Bruno: May I advise you about an instance of English usage? The word
"supposed" in the next sentence is often used as sarcasm to imply serious doubt
about the statement. In this context it can be interpreted as a slight. I think
you meant to say "assumed" which implies an evident fact. Please don't
apologize, we are most grateful for your efforts in using English and are happy
to make allowances for minor slips.

B = {Kim, Marty, Russell, Bruno, George, Jurgen} is  a set with 5 elements
which are supposed to be humans.

I also have a question: see below:

We have seen INTERSECTION, and UNION.

The intersection of the two sets S1 = {1, 2, 3} and S2 = {2, 3, 7, 8} will be
written (S1 \inter S2), and is equal to the set of elements which belongs to
both S1 and S2. We have

(S1 \inter S2) = {2, 3}

We can define (S1 \inter S2) = {x such-that ((x belongs-to S1) and (x
belongs-to S2))}

2 belongs to (S1 \inter S2) because ((2 belongs-to S1) and (2 belongs-to S2))
8 does not belongs to (S1 \inter S2) because it is false that ((2 belongs-to
S1) and (2 belongs-to S2)). Indeed 8 does not belong to S1.

Doesn't the statement in bold (above) contradict the statement immediately
preceding (also in bold)?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to