Prev: "Book Smart" NP-Complete Method: Musatov is closing in... Gaining... People are starting to talk...
Next: Was Einstein Guilty of Scientific Fraud?
From: Transfer Principle on 1 Jun 2010 15:24
On May 29, 12:46 am, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> "George Greene" <gree...(a)email.unc.edu> wrote
> > The most irritating of the cranks will
> > refuse to specify their axioms, or attack the legitimacy of "the"
> > axiomatic "method".
> Why is the axiomatic method legitimate?
> Bonus points if you can demonstrate this from axioms!

Here Cooper questions the legitimacy of the axiomatic method. He
is hardly the first sci.math poster to do so.

Regarding the four cases that I've listed earlier, I'd consider
rejecting the axiomatic method to be part of Case 2. Such posters
realize that one can use (the ZFC) axioms to prove an undesirable
result, and since the result is undesirable, rather than reject the
theory, they reject the axiomatic method altogether. The poster
WM is notorious for rejecting the axiomatic method, and now
Herc is also leaning in that direction.

I wish that posters who find the results proved from a theory to be
undesirable would reject just that _theory_, and consider other
theories which prove more desirable results. NFU proves the
existence of non-Cantorian sets for posters who reject Cantor,
while Pocket Set Theory, ZF-Infinity, and others abound for
those who don't like sets that are as large as some of those
whose existence is proved in ZFC.
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 1 Jun 2010 15:25
Transfer Principle <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> writes:

> We know that posters don't want to be bullied, and we know that
> they don't want to be patronized.

I want to be bullied and patronized.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 1 Jun 2010 16:45
"|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> writes:

> So is there a flaw with the following?

There's no flaw. It's just nonsense.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: |-|ercules on 1 Jun 2010 17:41
"Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi> wrote
> "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> So is there a flaw with the following?
>
> There's no flaw. It's just nonsense.

You disputed that it proved a smaller computation unit than the
Turing Machine fetch cycle, yes?

Herc
From: herbzet on 1 Jun 2010 23:59


Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Transfer Principle writes:
>
> > We know that posters don't want to be bullied, and we know that
> > they don't want to be patronized.
>
> I want to be bullied and patronized.

Bite me, sweetheart.

--
hz
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Prev: "Book Smart" NP-Complete Method: Musatov is closing in... Gaining... People are starting to talk...
Next: Was Einstein Guilty of Scientific Fraud?