Re: Motions M0040 and M0041: YES and NO - better wording of the last sentence.
Even after the correction Bill Walster's reasoning confuses
inclusion with containment, so I can't quite make sense of it.
> I would vote yes to Motion 41 if it says the empty interval exists,
> but is not the mathematical empty set, which is a member of every set.
Not necessarily. The Empty set is a *subset* of every set.
Note that set-based intervals have only only kind of member, namely
reals -- interval members are not themselves intervals.
This may be different for other flavors, where "containment" may have
a different interpretation. In Clause 2 (subject of M41) Empty appears
only it this flavor. Empty is not part of common evaluations, so this
point may be moot in this context.
Michel.
P.S. In any case, voting on M40 and M41 concluded a week ago...
---Sent: 2013-02-02 18:35:56 UTC