In article <lRXXs.97523$Ln.54803@newsfe22.iad>, Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca> wrote:
> On 28/02/2013 11:15 PM, Virgil wrote: > > In article <G8VXs.46028$Q91.31634@newsfe26.iad>, > > Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca> wrote: > > > >> On 28/02/2013 7:51 PM, Virgil wrote: > >>> In article <khUXs.345339$pV4.177097@newsfe21.iad>, > >>> Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 28/02/2013 8:27 AM, Frederick Williams wrote: > >>>>> Nam Nguyen wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 27/02/2013 10:12 PM, Virgil wrote: > >>>>>>> In article <R8AXs.345282$pV4.85998@newsfe21.iad>, > >>>>> > >>>>>>> The set of all functions from |N = {0,1,2,3,...} to {0,1,2,...,9} with > >>>>>>> each f interpreted as Sum _(i in |N) f(i)/10^1, defines such a > >>>>>>> structure.. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That doesn't look like a structure to me. Could you put all what > >>>>>> you've said above into a form using the notations of a structure? > >>>>> > >>>>> There is a set and a collection of functions on it. How does it fail to > >>>>> be a structure? > >>>> > >>>> From what textbook did you learn that a structure is defined as > >>>> "a set and a collection of functions on it"? > >>> > >>> Then give us your textbook definition of structure and show why the > >>> above fails to meet it. > >> > >> Shoenfield, Section 2.5 "Structures". One reason the above fails is, > >> you don't define, construct, the predicate (set) for the symbol '^'. > >> > >> And that's just 1 reason amongst others. Do you admit it now that > >> the above fails to meet the requirements of a language structure? > > > > No, though it may not satisfy your requirements, it satisfies mine well > > enough to go on with. > > > > Sci.math is not as formal as Principia Mathematica. > > Then a) you should have removed "sci.logic" from the list, > and b) should not have asked me to "give us your textbook definition > of structure and show why the above fails to meet it". You asked > for it and I've answered it: and you were wrong in your original > statement.
