Prev: EINSTEINERCISING MAKES YOU GO BLIND
Next: [GR] > The Number 401 - Aleph + Tav
From: Tegiri Nenashi on 1 Apr 2010 11:59
On Apr 1, 5:26 am, Frederick Williams <frederick.willia...(a)tesco.net>
wrote:
> /\ is fine: it's a bit bigger than the /\ of conjunction but ASCII
> cannot discriminate.  So how about /\ for the quantifier and ^ for
> conjunction?  I like U for universal--and so did Hintikka.

Well, if it were not too late, I'd propose (we are talking ASCII
notation only,of course) /\ for universal quantifier and \/ for
existential one. "^" and "v" are used for [dyadic] conjunction and
disjunction in some automatic prover systems already.

My original question cast in a bigger context: what is lambda
quantifier from logical perspective? The way it is introduced (when
f(x) assumed to have one free variable) doesn't feel natural. There is
algebraic flavor for all other other quantifiers: sum, product, upper
bound (binary max), lower bound, limit (average -- represented via
binary sum)...
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: EINSTEINERCISING MAKES YOU GO BLIND
Next: [GR] > The Number 401 - Aleph + Tav