Frames and Relativity

[djandus]

Upon seeing "with frame of reference" for a place tag in a definition, on of my students asked me if there was a way to differentiate between relativistic frames, etc.

I definitely want to shout this one out to the Lojban community because I'm very curious about a few interesting possibilities. Essentially, I'm running through a bunch of ideas I've had and hoping someone will correct me for any wrong ones.

Depending on the Mathematics or Physics being discussed, I can imagine using the {ma'i} modal tag would be sufficient.

So, I'm now imagining a statement like {tema'i lo ckini} or something similar to mean "in a relativistic frame".

Even better, there could be some cmevla for this, like {tema'i la .ainstain.} or similar.

With this sort of interpretation, then, you could do things like {tema'i ki la .ainstain.} for, "now discussing in relativistic frames".

So this seems pretty easy to me for managing bridi, but what about sumti?

If I have the {kamsutra} of particle 1, {ky.pa.}, in a couple of {manri} then can I say something like {ky.pa ma'i my.pa zmadu ky.pa ma'i my.re}?

If so, does this seem reasonable for notation? (It does to me, but I'm just wondering what others think.)

[David]

On Sep 2, 8:09 am, djandus <jan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Upon seeing "with frame of reference" for a place tag in a definition, on of
> my students asked me if there was a way to differentiate between
> relativistic frames, etc.
> I definitely want to shout this one out to the Lojban community because I'm
> very curious about a few interesting possibilities. Essentially, I'm running
> through a bunch of ideas I've had and hoping someone will correct me for any
> wrong ones.
>
> Depending on the Mathematics or Physics being discussed, I can imagine using
> the {ma'i} modal tag would be sufficient.
> So, I'm now imagining a statement like {tema'i lo ckini} or something
> similar to mean "in a relativistic frame".
> Even better, there could be some cmevla for this, like {tema'i la
> .ainstain.} or similar.
> With this sort of interpretation, then, you could do things like {tema'i ki
> la .ainstain.} for, "now discussing in relativistic frames".
> So this seems pretty easy to me for managing bridi, but what about sumti?
> If I have the {kamsutra} of particle 1, {ky.pa.}, in a couple of {manri}

ka sutra? So you're talking about the speediness (in the boolean or
'kind' sense rather than the 'amount' sense)?

> then can I say something like {ky.pa ma'i my.pa zmadu ky.pa ma'i my.re}?

AFAIK this will mean

K1 is more than K1 in-reference-frame M2

Because the modal attaches to the bridi, not the sumti.

One way I found to do this is

{ky.pa poi co'e ma'i my.pa zmadu ky.pa poi co'e ma'i my.re}

This treats [K1 which is something in-reference-frame M1] as a
distinct value from [K1 which is something in-reference-frame M2]

Which seems technically correct.

[Stela Selckiku]

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 7:09 PM, djandus <jan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> then can I say something like {ky.pa ma'i my.pa zmadu ky.pa ma'i my.re}?

That's clear enough, but really tags the bridi twice not the sumti.
I've never used it much, but I think what you want would be:

{ky. pa pe ma'i my. pa zmadu ky. pa pe ma'i my. re}

Is that right, jbocei?

mu'o mi'e la stela selckiku