[CST-2] T in C

[Shu Yan Chan]

----- Original Message -----
From: "M.Y.W.Y. Becker" <mywyb2@cam.ac.uk>
To: <cst-2@srcf.ucam.org>
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [CST-2] D CommII and TinC


>So the axioms of the logic are T, F and possibly sets of processes.
>
> > of state/process. Then, how can we be convince that if an assertion is
> > true for B, and B is bisimiliar to C, the assertion would also be true
> > for C as well?  If the assertion is just true for process B, then
> > it would not hold true for C...  Clearly I have some big miss
> > understanding somewhere...
>
> If B is an element of the assertion (which is a denotation of a set) why
> shouldn't C also be an element of the assertion?

My question really is, can't I define a set which only has B as its element,
and use that as an assertion. Then even though B bisimilar to C, C would not
be an element of that assertion?  What stopping me to make such definition?

Thanks.

Shu Yan