Logic

lemmas by contradiction usually mean the author forgot he invoked a theorem #613 Correcting Math
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped) Now here is this proof after it is corrected with the Unique Prime Factorization theorem: DIRECT Method (constructive method), long-form; Infinitude of Primes Proof (1) Definition of prime as a positive integer divisible only by itself and 1. ... 30 Jun 2010 05:25

Ore's direct method improves mine own #612 Correcting Math
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: [0] Michael *Hardy* and Catherine Woodgold, "*Prime* *Simplicity*",  *Mathematical Intelligencer<https://mail.google.com/wiki/Mathematical_Intelligencer> --- quoting from Mathematical Intelligencer MI of Ore's direct proof --- page 65 of Øystein Ore’s book Number T... 30 Jun 2010 06:30

How Can ZFC/PA do much of Math - it Can't Even Prove PAisConsistent (EASY PROOF)
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:54:50 -0400, herbzet <herbzet(a)gmail.com> said: Chris Menzel wrote: billh04 said: I thought that the proof of consistency of PA relative to ZFC by showing that there is a model of PA in ZFC was a metatheorem, not a theorem stated in ZFC and proved using the axioms of ZF... 2 Jul 2010 05:50

Can there be a different semantic for FOL formulas?
On and off, I've wondered if the entire FOL syntactical proofs would be able to support different semantic for "A" and "E": different than the typical quantifier semantics "For all" and "There exists"? For example, if we let Ax[P(x)] and Ex[P(x)] to be specifiers (instead of quantifiers) to mean "That x is P", "... 2 Jul 2010 11:18

How Can ZFC/PA do much of Math - it Can't Even Prove PA isConsistent (EASY PROOF)
Frederick Williams <frederick.williams2(a)tesco.net> writes: Chris Menzel wrote: [...] any such proof [of the consistency of PA], when formalized, will be in a system stronger than PA itself [...] It seems to me that PA and a theory that proves its consistency can be incomparable. Isn't this t... 3 Jul 2010 12:23

ALWAYS REPRIEVING RELATIVITY
THE OLD RAT SENTENCED TO DEATH: http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538 Paul Davies: "Was Einstein wrong? Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is the only scientific formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here stands for the speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of the basic... 1 Jul 2010 06:41

Harold Edwards publish a Euclid IP proof? Address of Mathematical Intelligencer? #610 Correcting Math
David Bernier wrote: Archimedes Plutonium wrote: [0] Michael *Hardy* and Catherine Woodgold, "*Prime* *Simplicity*", *Mathematical Intelligencer<https://mail.google.com/wiki/Mathematical_Intelligencer> I was contacted that the above has Archimedes Plutonium's ideas publishe... 28 Jun 2010 16:10

proper analysis of Euclid's Infinitude of Primes rather than the botched job of Hardy/Woodgold and Mathematical Intelligencer #609 Correcting Math
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: [0] Michael *Hardy* and Catherine Woodgold, "*Prime* *Simplicity*",  *Mathematical Intelligencer<https://mail.google.com/wiki/ Mathematical_Intelligencer> There is a paragraph in that article that riles me. And shows how out of place are the authors of the art... 28 Jun 2010 04:06

RICHARD FEYNMAN ABOUT THE SPEED OF LIGHT
The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume 1, Chapter 15-1: "Suppose we are riding in a car that is going at a speed u, and light from the rear is going past the car with speed c. Differentiating the first equation in (15.2) gives dx'/dt=dx/dt-u, which means that according to the Galilean transformation the apparent s... 1 Jul 2010 02:22

How Can ZFC/PA do much of Math - it Can't Even Prove PA is Consistent (EASY PROOF)
Transfer Principle (lwalke3(a)lausd.net) writes: On Jun 26, 7:51=A0pm, Tim Little <t...(a)little-possums.net> wrote: On 2010-06-26, R. Srinivasan <sradh...(a)in.ibm.com> wrote: The theory ZF-Inf+~Inf clearly proves ~Inf ("Infinite sets do not exist"). Actually ~Inf does not assert "Infinite sets do not... 29 Jun 2010 22:54