Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> logic B (KTB) can be used to capture a notion of vagueness, and, by a
> theorem of Goldblatt, it can be used to formalise classicaly a
> form of von Neuman quantum logic in a manner similar to the way the
> modal logic S4, or S4Grz, capture intuitionistic logic.
The Gödel-McKinsey-Tarski translation from intuitionistic logic to S4
can be defined in different ways. The most concise one is by saying
that one has to insert a  before every subformula. Can we
reformulate the translation by Goldblatt in a similar way, e.g., by
saying that one has to insert <> before every subformula ?
> > Suppose the atomic propositions are what I currently know on a
> > physical system.
> This does not make sense.
Really? it made some sense to me...
> Again. Just remember that I am not supposing any physics at all, nor
> any "physical world".
My initial question was not referring to your work in particular.
However I would be glad to hear more from your point of view.
> Did you grasp the UDA's point?
No, but I am interested in and will try to catch up.
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at