[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Linguistic hair-splitting

Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Linguistic hair-splitting
From: Jochem Berndsen
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:39:04 +0100
Andrew Coppin wrote:
>> 7 is a number. 7 is an integer, and integers are numbers.
> 7 is not a field. 7 is an element of [at least one] field, but 7 itself
> is not a field.
> 7 is not a group. 

Why not? It might be useful to use the notation '7' for the cyclic group
with 7 elements.

> 7 is a member of the set of integers, but the set of
> integers is not a group either. The set of integers form a group when
> taken together with the addition operator. (And, actually, forms
> another, different, group when taken with the multiplication operator.)

The integers endowed with the usual multiplication is not a group. (The
only invertible elements of this monoid are 1 and -1.)

> Now, here's the question: Is is correct to say that [3, 5, 8] is a
> monad? 

In what sense would this be a monad? I don't quite get your question.

Cheers, Jochem

Jochem Berndsen | [email protected]

Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>