Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- From: "Justin Young" <x_static66@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 02:27:51 GMT
<porky_pig_jr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1116121541.534219.258870@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >It is hard to help you when you do not provide the information
>>required. Your textbook tells you that you must read the definitions
>>carefully, but you did not think that perhaps others may have to read
>>them to know what you are talking about.
>
> Yes, my only excuse is that I've thought both definitions are fairly
> standard so there is no need to post them. Now I feel like this is not
> the case which frankly surprises me. If the same operation is defined
> in different ways, and those different ways lead to entirely different
> answers --- well, I"m in trouble.
this is not true. definitions can be different but equivalent.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- From: porky_pig_jr@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- References:
- a set family indexed by an empty set
- From: porky_pig_jr@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- From: Arturo Magidin
- Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- From: porky_pig_jr@xxxxxxxxxxx
- a set family indexed by an empty set
- Prev by Date: Re: Beer constant
- Next by Date: Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- Previous by thread: Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- Next by thread: Re: a set family indexed by an empty set
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|