Prev: I LOVE YOU QUOTES & LOVE METER
Next: geometry precisely defining ellipsis and how infinity is in the midsection #426 Correcting Math
From: HawkLogic on 10 Feb 2010 16:53 On Feb 10, 2:17 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 10, 2:16 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 10, 1:03 pm, HawkLogic <hawklo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Is there any way to know that accepted methods of logical proof do not > > > lead to contradiction. > > > Yes.You're not familiar with the soundness theorem for first order > > logic? > > Anyway, what specific logical principles do you doubt preserve > consistency? > > MoeBlee I doubt that consistency is always preserved when self-reference is used.
From: Frederick Williams on 10 Feb 2010 16:54 HawkLogic wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2:16 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 10, 1:03 pm, HawkLogic <hawklo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Is there any way to know that accepted methods of logical proof do not > > > lead to contradiction. > > > > Yes.You're not familiar with the soundness theorem for first order > > logic? > > > > MoeBlee > > Godel seems to have found a way around soundness. What has Godel got to do with the soundness of FOL? -- .... A lamprophyre containing small phenocrysts of olivine and augite, and usually also biotite or an amphibole, in a glassy groundmass containing analcime.
From: HawkLogic on 10 Feb 2010 17:03 On Feb 10, 3:54 pm, Frederick Williams <frederick.willia...(a)tesco.net> wrote: > HawkLogic wrote: > > > On Feb 10, 2:16 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 10, 1:03 pm, HawkLogic <hawklo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Is there any way to know that accepted methods of logical proof do not > > > > lead to contradiction. > > > > Yes.You're not familiar with the soundness theorem for first order > > > logic? > > > > MoeBlee > > >Godelseems to have found a way around soundness. > > What hasGodelgot to do with the soundness of FOL? > > -- > ... A lamprophyre containing small phenocrysts of olivine and > augite, and usually also biotite or an amphibole, in a glassy > groundmass containing analcime. Godel invented a method which has unexplored consequences.
From: Frederick Williams on 10 Feb 2010 17:06 HawkLogic wrote: > > On Feb 10, 3:54 pm, Frederick Williams <frederick.willia...(a)tesco.net> > wrote: > > HawkLogic wrote: > > > > > On Feb 10, 2:16 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 10, 1:03 pm, HawkLogic <hawklo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Is there any way to know that accepted methods of logical proof do not > > > > > lead to contradiction. > > > > > > Yes.You're not familiar with the soundness theorem for first order > > > > logic? > > > > > > MoeBlee > > > > >Godel seems to have found a way around soundness. > > > > What has Godel got to do with the soundness of FOL? > > Godel invented a method which has unexplored consequences. And what has that method got to do with the soundness of FOL? I take it that you're talking about the arithmetization of syntax. -- .... A lamprophyre containing small phenocrysts of olivine and augite, and usually also biotite or an amphibole, in a glassy groundmass containing analcime.
From: Frederick Williams on 10 Feb 2010 17:07
HawkLogic wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2:17 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2:16 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 10, 1:03 pm, HawkLogic <hawklo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Is there any way to know that accepted methods of logical proof do not > > > > lead to contradiction. > > > > > Yes.You're not familiar with the soundness theorem for first order > > > logic? > > > > Anyway, what specific logical principles do you doubt preserve > > consistency? > > > > MoeBlee > > I doubt that consistency is always preserved when self-reference is > used. How does FOL self-refer? -- .... A lamprophyre containing small phenocrysts of olivine and augite, and usually also biotite or an amphibole, in a glassy groundmass containing analcime. |