realitista@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 6 months agoNon-binarylemmy.worldimagemessage-square210fedilinkarrow-up11.42Karrow-down1107
arrow-up11.32Karrow-down1imageNon-binarylemmy.worldrealitista@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 6 months agomessage-square210fedilink
minus-squareitslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up63·6 months agoThere are bullfrogs and elephant bulls, so we can conclude that {🐸}∩{🐘}⊂{🐂}
minus-squarecasmael@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up11·6 months agoHmm perhaps some kind of sliding scale is in order
minus-squareJessica@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up9arrow-down1·6 months agoI think you actually want {🐸}∪{🐘}⊂{🐂} because ∪ is union and ∩ is intersection. There are no frogs that are also elephants so the set would be empty and thus couldn’t contain any bulls. 😔
minus-squareitslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up9·6 months agoAktshually, the empty set is a subset of any other set 🤓 But also, the fact that frogs and elephants are disjunct is conjecture at this point
minus-squareHyphlosion@donphan.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up3·6 months agoThat’s a very frogressive thing to say.
There are bullfrogs and elephant bulls, so we can conclude that {🐸}∩{🐘}⊂{🐂}
Hmm perhaps some kind of sliding scale is in order
I think you actually want {🐸}∪{🐘}⊂{🐂} because ∪ is union and ∩ is intersection. There are no frogs that are also elephants so the set would be empty and thus couldn’t contain any bulls. 😔
Aktshually, the empty set is a subset of any other set 🤓
But also, the fact that frogs and elephants are disjunct is conjecture at this point
Frogness is a spectrum
That’s a very frogressive thing to say.