Give me ONE digit position of any real that isn't computableup to that digit position!
in [Logic]
|
Prev: Give me ONE digit position of any real that isn't computable up
Next: Simple hack to get $500 to your home
From: Nam Nguyen on 10 Jun 2010 00:00 Transfer Principle wrote: > I want to see a thread which > starts with a poster discussing a theory other than > ZF(C), Sure. I started a thread call "A more restrictive set theory" (Oct. 10, 2009) but there didn't seem much discussion. The main idea there is placing a restriction as to what sets would exist. An additional axiom was introduced to ZF which I'm retyping it here: Exy[(y e P(x)) -> (0 = {y})] In addition, ZF could be further extended to have multiple epsilon relations, beside the normal e. That would be a start, imho.
From: Nam Nguyen on 10 Jun 2010 01:09 Jesse F. Hughes wrote: > Transfer Principle <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> writes: > >> The closest that I've seen to such a poster is Nam >> Nguyen, who does appear to be respected more than most >> posters challenging standard theory. > > Nam's considerably more coherent than guys like Herc and AP, but I > wouldn't say that he's respected in any reasonable sense of the word. > Jesse's arguments are more cohesive than those of Herc and AP, but I wouldn't call his arguments respected, reasonable, or at times even logical at all.
From: Nam Nguyen on 12 Jun 2010 14:11
MoeBlee wrote: > On Jun 9, 6:50 pm, Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > >> Nam >> Nguyen > > is overwhelmingly confused about some of the most basic matters in > mathematical logic, and worse, (with rare exception) he will not allow > himself to be corrected, educated, or enlightened by the many quite > informed posters who try. It is usually a dead end trying to have a > rational discussion with Nguyen. This is shown over and over again in > thread after thread. And it's definitely not a matter of "a new > theory" but rather that he purports to represent a correct > understanding of standard, ordinary mathematical logic while yet he's > horribly mixed up about it. > > MoeBlee > The voice of a _pathetic_ incarnation of the Inquisition. I had some technical issues to discuss about a new ZF axiom, about FOL based definition of AI and Moeblee has nothing to respond or to post except very pathetic trashing! |