Hi allexperts.com -
Not sure, maybe I am sending this to the wrong expert. I have been studying
Leibniz for about 3 years (retired, at home) and would like to find practical
applications to his metaphysics. His metaphysics ends at a top level, with God
as the all-seer and all-doer, and below
On 07 Aug 2011, at 21:41, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 1, 2:29 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Bruno Stephen,
Isn't there a concept of imprecision in absolute physical measurement
and drift in cosmological constants? Are atoms and molecules all
infinitesimally different in size
On Aug 8, 12:03 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 07 Aug 2011, at 21:41, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 1, 2:29 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Bruno Stephen,
Isn't there a concept of imprecision in absolute physical measurement
and drift in cosmological
On Aug 1, 2:29 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Bruno Stephen,
Isn't there a concept of imprecision in absolute physical measurement
and drift in cosmological constants? Are atoms and molecules all
infinitesimally different in size or are they absolutely the same
size? Certainly
On 7/31/2011 7:40 PM, Pzomby wrote:
The following quote is from the book “What is Mathematics Really?” by
Reuben Hersh
“0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal to themselves! No object is unequal
to itself, so 0 is the class of all
On Aug 1, 5:24 am, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:
On 7/31/2011 7:40 PM, Pzomby wrote:
The following quote is from the book What is Mathematics Really? by
Reuben Hersh
0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal
On 01 Aug 2011, at 01:40, Pzomby wrote:
The following quote is from the book “What is Mathematics Really?” by
Reuben Hersh
“0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal to themselves! No object is unequal
to itself, so 0 is the class
Reblogging myself here, but curious to see what you think of the idea
that 1 cannot be proven greater than 0.
Someone’s comment on the previous chart mentioned the difficulty
(impossibility?) of proving that 1 0. It’s an interesting kernel
there, and it reminds me of the whole “time does not
On 31 Jul 2011, at 14:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Reblogging myself here, but curious to see what you think of the idea
that 1 cannot be proven greater than 0.
In which theory?
The notion of proof is theory and definition dependent. (contrary to
computability, which is absolute, by Church
On Jul 31, 9:49 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
In which theory?
The notion of proof is theory and definition dependent. (contrary to
computability, which is absolute, by Church thesis).
If you agree to define x y by Ez(z+x = y) E = It exists. I
assume classical logic +
On 31 Jul 2011, at 17:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Jul 31, 9:49 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
In which theory?
The notion of proof is theory and definition dependent. (contrary to
computability, which is absolute, by Church thesis).
If you agree to define x y by Ez(z+x = y)
On 7/31/2011 8:15 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Reblogging myself here, but curious to see what you think of the idea
that 1 cannot be proven greater than 0.
Someone’s comment on the previous chart mentioned the difficulty
(impossibility?) of proving that 1 0. It’s an interesting kernel
there,
On Jul 31, 11:58 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
How do we know that 0 has a successor though? If 0 x = x and x -0 = x
then maybe s(0)=0 or Ezs(0)... Can we disprove the idea that a
successor to zero does not exist?
No. 0 is primitive term, and the language allows the term
On Jul 31, 1:19 pm, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:
Hi Craig,
Umm, what would be the point of coming up with yet another
representation system for quantities? We already established that a
description is not its referent even though for every referent there is
at least one
The following quote is from the book “What is Mathematics Really?” by
Reuben Hersh
“0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal to themselves! No object is unequal
to itself, so 0 is the class of all empty sets. But all empty sets
have
15 matches
Mail list logo
