Wuzzy wrote:
> filipos wrote:
> > I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it)
as
> >
> > "x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation
x3",
> No, no, no, NO!
> That’s WAY too far off from the original definitions.
> Those definitions certainly would need new words.

Ok, this is more for fun than for the original point, but here is a PEG
for the Klein group

I <- e I | a A | b B | c C | eps
A <- e A | a I | b C | c B
B <- e B | a C | b I | c A
C <- e C | a B | b A | c I

More trivially, it is straightforward to define an attribute grammar for
computing the product of a sequence of elements.

So, we do have words (the sequences), interpretations for these words (the
values) and rules for how to determine the meaning of a composition of
them from its parts (the group operation).

Comment #5: Re: Mathematics

Curtis W Franks (Tue Jan 14 07:29:34 2014)

filipos wrote: > Wuzzy wrote: > > filipos wrote: > > > I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it) > as > > > > > > "x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation > x3", > > No, no, no, NO! > > That’s WAY too far off from the original definitions. > > Those definitions certainly would need new words. > > Ok, this is more for fun than for the original point, but here is a PEG > for the Klein group > > I <- e I | a A | b B | c C | eps > A <- e A | a I | b C | c B > B <- e B | a C | b I | c A > C <- e C | a B | b A | c I > > More trivially, it is straightforward to define an attribute grammar for > computing the product of a sequence of elements. > > So, we do have words (the sequences), interpretations for these words (the > values) and rules for how to determine the meaning of a composition of > them from its parts (the group operation). That is what I was thinking. One could always tack on a seltau indicating 'math'-ness on some level.