Prev: Chapt 3, Fiberglass Experiment; Are the quasars nothing more than the last of the Supernova in view? #65; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: Inscribed triangles
From: zuhair on 13 May 2010 23:59 On May 10, 10:13 am, Marshall <marshall.spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 7, 2:20 pm, zuhair <zaljo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 7, 8:18 am, Marshall <marshall.spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I regret I don't have time to respond to all of your detailed > comments. > Let me just explain the bit about substitution. (It's a consideration > that's > important to me and my applications; it may have no relevance to > you at all.) > > Consider the subset of first order logic in which quantifiers are > limited > to a single level of universal quantification. Marshall wrote: Quote--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is related to > equational logic. In such cases we can omit the quantifiers entirely; every unbound variable is implicitly universally quantified. This allows us to write the associative property like this: x ^ (y ^ z) = (x ^ y) ^ z Quite terse and easy to understand, imho. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote finished. Well, I don't see were this system fail your desired properties. the above can be simply be written using this system as: x. y z = x y. z I know you are using variables. However suppose we are using formulas Q,P,R then we can have the following: Q. P R :<> Q P. R Zuhair > > In such a system, every variable in any true formula can be > replaced with any expression, and it will yield a true formula. > (Modulo issues of name capture.) The replacement, or > substitution, can be simple textual substitution. > > This is an important property, and one which I don't think > you're supporting. But it may not matter to your particular > application. > > Also, and I wish I had thought of this sooner, but here's a > paper that you really ought to read: > > from Boolean Algebra to Unified Algebra > Eric C. R. Hehner > > http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/BAUA.pdf > > I was quite taken by this paper. I really didn't think > there was much useful to say about syntax, and this > paper demonstrates otherwise. > > In looking it up, I discover that he also has some new > papers on similar topic; I can't vouch for them, but I > will certainly read them. Who knows, he may have something > awesome or he may have gone off the deep end. :-) > > Oh, another tiny comment: the "rationale" as it were for > ^ and v being used for AND and OR comes from lattice > theory. Boolean algebra is a kind of lattice algebra, and > those symbols make exquisite sense in the context of > lattices. > > Marshall |