John Edser wrote:


>>BOH:-
>>Ah, so are you defining "separate sets" as ones that do
not have any 
>>elements in common?
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>Absolutely separate sets are NOT intersected
>>with any other set. 


>>>BOH:-
>>>By "separate", do you mean "having no elements
in common"?
> 
>  
> 
>>>JE:-
>>>No, as I specifically stated, I 
>>>referred to absolutely separate sets
>>>that contain the _same_ set element 
>>>type.
> 
> 
>>BOH:-
>>The same type of element maybe, but can the actual elements that are of 
>>the same type be in both sets?
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>Only when they intersect. 
>>The whole point of having absolutely
>>separate sets that contain the same type
>>of set element is to be able to join
>>or intersect sets.
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> That's rather pointless - 
> you've just written that they can't 
> intersect.
> 
> JE:-
> No I did not. 


Absolutely separate sets are NOT intersected with any other set.


The same element
> type can exist in absolutely 
> separate sets so these sets
> CAN intersect, i.e. you can have
> separate sets that contain the
> same element types, but for the
> same element to be in two sets 
> at once, two sets have to 
> actually intersect.
> 
Indeed, but separate sets don't, by your own definition.

Bob

-- 
Bob O'Hara

Rolf Nevanlinna Institute
P.O. Box 4 (Yliopistonkatu 5)
FIN-00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Telephone: +358-9-191 23743
Mobile: +358 50 599 0540
Fax:  +358-9-191 22 779
WWW:  http://www.RNI.Helsinki.FI/~boh/
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 11/10/03 3:33:48 PM