Phone game: Gleem

[Major <cbmvax!uunet!PTA.PYRAMID.COM.AU!major>]

Ivan A Derzhanski <iad@cogsci.edinburgh.ac.uk> writes:

> >  This is elementary metrology. In arithmetic, 9/10 = .9,
>
> .. yes, that's how it is in arithmetic, hence also in mex ...
>
> >  but in physics, or applied maths, or the real world, they are not the
> >  same, because they imply different standards of accuracy.
>
> Which leads me to believe that my idea of physics, applied maths and
> the real world is totally incompatible with yours.  I've never thought
> of ".9" as being in any way different from "1/9".

Ignoring the typo and assuming you mean "9/10" not "1/9": Do you also
see "1/3" as equal to .3 or is it .33 or .3333 etc ?

> >  As I said in
> >  an earlier mail, all measurements (and hence all numbers used as
> >  quantifiers) have an express or implied accuracy.
>
> Not unless John's mex paper says so, and I think it doesn't.

Kolin was talking about the numbers, not their lojban representation.
John's paper has no effect on the numbers any more than the gismu list
changes the color space by defining (or failing to define) color words.

Major