Bob, I should probably apologize for that jab, it was just that yours
about keeping straws dry got me thinking about all the cake and eat it
talk here lately and you being one of the few posters who I still read,
I had this quirky impulse to wind you up. The coincidental posts about
parentage might have helped put me in that mood. If I may make a
personal comment, perhaps I thought you'd be inspired to illuminate me
one way or the other, which I think you're quite capable of when you're
in the mood.
You've discounted the notion before, it's basically just a relation that
has an attribute that is of the same type as that same relation. For
some reason that I can't explain very well, it's long bugged me that the
RM seems to need a fundamental operator for to get transitive closure,
so if that could ever be avoided, it just seemed to me that structures
must aid it. Maybe such a relation is just a paradox that I can't see.
cheers,
