tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 24 21:46:45 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: use {law'/puS} mI'mey jISam 'u'vo' ghom
Alan Anderson wrote:
>
> ja' Ed <[email protected]>:
> >ghomDaq jIvum nger, mI'mey jISam 'u'vo' ghom,
> >Qap mI'mey, pagh'e'.
>
> nuqjatlh? I can't make sense of this at all, and my simpleminded
> translation program produces nothing useful.
>
> *> In group I work theory, numbers I locate from universe group,
> *> succeed numbers, _nothing_."
>
> Oh, maybe it *does* produce something that I can tease something from.
> Are you trying to explain something about mathematical "group theory"?
> The vocabulary doesn't quite seem up to the task, and I'm pretty sure
> you're having trouble with the grammar, which isn't helping things any.
> Since I don't know the first thing about what you're trying to say, I
> am unable to read through the apparent misplaced words. If you want
> help with saying it more clearly, you'll have to explain what you mean
> in English first. :-)
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
ghomDaq jIvum nger, mI'mey jISam 'u'vo' ghom,
Qap mI'mey, pagh'e'.
lo'laH ghoHta'meH, *{tkd 70}*
Alpha Delta law' Beta Delta puS
majatlh,
'oHmo' ghomvam Alpha 'ay'mey ngaSbogh Delta,
'ej 'oHmo' ghomvam Beta 'ay'mey ngaSbogh Delta,
ma'angbejlI'jaj,
tu'lu' ghomDaq ngaSta' Alpha, 'ay'mey law' Delta,
'ej tu'lu' ghomDaq ngaSta' Beta, 'ay'mey puS Delta,
{mo' Delta | Alpha > Beta }
I tried to explain that I was working in group number theory, getting
numbers from the universal set (group),Working with numbers we discover
zero, what I set out to find.
In math often you must prove the obvious before you can do anything
else.
I used the example fron the book, the argument from tkd pg 70.
<majatlh> Because it this group "Alpha" contains elements "Delta" and
because this group "Beta" contains elements "Delta".<ma'angbejlI'jaj>.
We may show that there is contained in "Alpha" be meny components
"Delta", and there is contained in "Beta" be few components "Delta".
{mo' Delta | Alpha > Beta }
Rational for elements Delta, Alpha is greater than Beta.
What the prof. goes on to say, is that we can find an equality, from
the advisarial argument, (OPPS, forgot to put in this part)
//Alpha Beta muvta'chugh 'ay'mey Delta//
tu'lu' ghomDaq ngaSta' Alpha, 'ay'mey law'be' Delta,
'ej tu'lu' ghomDaq ngaSta' Beta, 'ay'mey puSbe' Delta,
qoj 'ay'meyvaD Delta ghomDaq Alpha ghomDaq rapjaj Beta,
(mo' Delta |Alpha <= Beta)
Which allows the equality if the two groups are joined or overlap, In a
vien diagram, (or universial group).
If "Alpha" is joined to "Beta" for components "Delta".
there is contained in group "Alpha" not be meny components "Delta",
and there is contained in group "Beta" not be few components "Delta",
and/or components "Delta" in group "Alpha" may be the dsame as "Beta".
(mo' Delta |Alpha <= Beta)
rational for elements Delta, Alpha is less than or equal to Beta.
This is because the group Alpha may have more components of Delta, But
the region outside of the group Alpha, may not have more components of
Delta, because if they overlap, a portion of those elemnts would be
contained in the group Beta.So there can be more or the same number of
elements Delta, outside of Beta.