Re: {loi} electron

[Logical Language Group <lojbab>]

la bab. cusku di'e

> However, we also count electrons; for example, on one oil droplet,
> Millikan detected three electrons.  This suggests, which is contrary
> to the sumti paper:
> 
>     la milikan pu ganse ci loi dikca
> 
> What should I say, to talk about three electrongs, that are not part
> of a team, are not typical or stereotypical, are not merely what I am
> designating, are `for real', but also are truly all identical; maybe
> all the same single entity, merely moving for fractions of a Planck
> time from one spot/velocity to another?

I think you want just "ci lo dicka'u" (dikca kantu) here, where we need
a specific word for "electron".  "lo dikca" is what Millikan detected, but
also (and more centrally) what Franklin detected: "a quantity of electrical
charge" (not necessarily a quantum of it).  The word "kantu" may or may
not embed the Feynman view of there being only one electron.
Lojban's logic is classical logic for the most part, and doesn't allow for
"three things which are all identical".  If they are truly identical, they
are not "three things", but one thing.  (This is why some people don't
believe that "du" belongs in Lojban, or exact-number quantifiers either,
which are really part of the same notion.  "No entity without identity.")

-- 
John Cowan		sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.