MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Monday November 25, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search
292 bytes added
, 20:00, 4 May 2009
Line 5,626: |
Line 5,626: |
| ===Commentary Note 12.3=== | | ===Commentary Note 12.3=== |
| | | |
− | Peirce next considers a pair of compound involutions, stating an equation between them that is analogous to one of the usual laws of exponents in ordinary arithmetic, namely, <math>(a^b)^c = a^{bc}.\!</math> | + | Peirce next considers a pair of compound involutions, stating an equation between them that is analogous to one of the laws of exponents in ordinary arithmetic, namely, the law that states <math>(a^b)^c = a^{bc}.\!</math> |
| | | |
| {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" <!--QUOTE--> | | {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" <!--QUOTE--> |
Line 5,652: |
Line 5,652: |
| |} | | |} |
| | | |
− | Converting the relative term <math>\mathit{s}^{(\mathit{l}\mathrm{w})}\!</math> into its set-theoretic equivalent is fairly immediate:
| + | Articulating the compound relative term <math>\mathit{s}^{(\mathit{l}\mathrm{w})}\!</math> in set-theoretic terms is fairly immediate: |
| | | |
| {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" | | {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" |
| | <math>\mathit{s}^{(\mathit{l}\mathrm{w})} ~=~ \bigcap_{x \in LW} \operatorname{proj}_1 (S \star x) ~=~ \bigcap_{x \in LW} (S \cdot x)</math> | | | <math>\mathit{s}^{(\mathit{l}\mathrm{w})} ~=~ \bigcap_{x \in LW} \operatorname{proj}_1 (S \star x) ~=~ \bigcap_{x \in LW} (S \cdot x)</math> |
| |} | | |} |
| + | |
| + | But doing the same thing for the compound relative term <math>(\mathit{s}^\mathit{l})^\mathrm{w}\!</math> is less immediate, the hang-up being that we have yet to define the case of logical involution that raises a 2-adic relative term to the power of a 2-adic relative teram. |
| | | |
| {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" | | {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" |