Logic
in [Science]
|
All you have to do is c o m p r e h e n d this statement and diagonalisation falls apart "herbzet" <herbzet(a)gmail.com> wrote > Colin wrote: "|-|ercules" wrote: [snip] Why do you insist on flogging a dead horse? Even wikipedia writes "Although the set of real numbers is uncountable, the set of computable numbers is countable and thus almost all real numbers are not co... 13 Jun 2010 01:51
All you have to do is c o m p r e h e n d this statement anddiagonalisation falls apart |-|ercules wrote: correction. "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> wrote perhaps if it was acknowledged modifying the diagonal (DID NOT) results in a new digit sequence that is not computable, then we could increase the scope I've read that Turing was trying hard to get the intuitive id... 12 Jun 2010 20:25
A Reformulation of Z-Reg. I think that Z-Reg. is equal to the following theory in FOL(=,e) with the following axiom schemes: (1)Comprehension: If phi is a formula in which at least y is free, and in which x is not free, then all closures of Ar As E!x Ay (y e x <-> ((y c r \/ y c s) /\ phi)) are axioms. were c refers to the subset ... 15 Jun 2010 20:56
Download new programs and english courses Download new programs and english courses it is free now http://www.translatorhossam.co.cc/ ... 12 Jun 2010 14:53
Why Extensionality is an axiom? Hi all, I wonder why Extensionality is considered an axiom? What I mean by Extensionality is the following sentence in FOL with identity"=",and membership"e": Ax Ay Az(z e x <-> z e y) -> x=y Now this sentence can be a theorem of a theory that has exactly all axioms of Z with a very slight modification... 21 Jun 2010 20:18
All you have to do is c o m p r e h e n d this statement and diagonalisation falls apart Every possible digit sequence is computable to ALL (an INFINITE AMOUNT of) finite initial substrings. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2 or 3 posters on sci.math have agreed with that statement. BTW: ALL (an INFINITE AMOUNT of) natural number... 13 Jun 2010 01:51
Reality There is a space filling medium. It is capable of motion and resilience. It exerts an expansive pressure in all directions. It is but a small step from there to the recognition that this very same material substance is what is formed into the atoms and molecules of gross matter. To take that step, however, a vast... 23 Jun 2010 23:53
EINSTEINIANS AS MARAUDERS High priests in Einsteiniana have always known that Einstein's 1905 light postulate is false, that its antithesis given by Newton's emission theory of light is true and that Einstein's 1954 confession announcing the death of physics was quite reasonable: http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5... 19 Jun 2010 02:40
The right way to question the uncountability of the reals Its likely that some of you have had thoughts like mine before, so I am directing this to those of you who havent taken to time to think of things from the perspective I will develop here. Ive seen some threads in sci.logic and sci.math initiated by posters that were confident that they have found flaws in Can... 15 Jun 2010 03:16
I request of NANA to expunge all Hughes posts where my name isat the bottom Re: An Ultrafinite Set Theory (6/10/10 4:56 PM), Barb Knox wrote: In article <00537029-ea1e-4c83-a597-998c26607676(a)o30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, Transfer Principle<lwalke3(a)lausd.net> wrote: [SNIP] And so this gives us another generalization about the difference between standard theorists and "cranks" (which maight be view... 10 Jun 2010 22:22 |