Hi Brian,
Le 10-avr.-08, à 04:35, Brian Tenneson a écrit :
Hi Bruno,
It's not a new idea, no. However, I find the classical logic
restriction to make set theories with a universal set as unnatural
(e.g., some automatically sacrifice choice) as one that uses FL might
seem to others.
Hi Bruno,
It's not a new idea, no. However, I find the classical logic
restriction to make set theories with a universal set as unnatural
(e.g., some automatically sacrifice choice) as one that uses FL might
seem to others. I mainly want to know if Russel type paradoxes are
completely
Hi Brian,
Your idea of a universal set, in case it works, would indeed meet one
of the objection I often raised against Tegmark-like approaches, mainly
that the whole of mathematical reality cannot be defined as a
mathematical object. Of course this is debatable, and a case can been
made
I would tend to think that most mathematicians and even more
physicists and even more engineers and even more laymen would say that
'just' is a huge, huge understatement.
However, from the perspective of Non-Classical logic (be it
paraconsistent or fuzzy), that sentence was perfectly formulated,
4 matches
Mail list logo
