Math Forum / Mathematics / Mathematical Logic / July 2007

Truth Among Mathematikers and Empirics
                                             ~v~~
Arguing truth among mathematikers and empirics is like arguing virtue
among whores.

[quote name='abaddon_fff' post='348736' date='Jul 28 2007, 06:44 AM']
    For all the forum members, I would recommend that you read at
least ONE book:  Henry David Thoreaus [u]Essay on Civil Disobedience[/
u].  It will CHANGE the way that you view activism, and society in

we have statement S
a structural data type
 that we interpret semantically as a computable specification for an observation
what is its value?

In a book I'm reading about Boolean logic, while introducing the
concept of Boolean variables and constants, the author is careful to
make the following  the distinction:
"Even though I say very emphatically that p, q, r, etc., and also true

My brother tells me there is a blue plaque on 76 Storey's Way in
Cambridge which says that Wittgenstein lived there.  As I thought he
lived in college when he returned to Cambridge from 1929 on, did
Wittgenstein live there when he was a student (1908-1914) ?

I was perusing the sci.math FAQ the other day and ran into a fascinating
topic I hadn't seen before.  It's called Freiling's Axiom of Symmetry.  
It appears about 3/4 down the page at
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci-math-faq/AC/ContinuumHyp/.

(This post is part of the campaign to save logic in Usenet. You can
contribute by posting sense).
Zuhair here has proposed a formulation of set theory, amounting
essentially to postulating a finite supply of ur-elements and

SATELLITE TV for PC - Amazing Software which Instantly Turns your
Computer into a Super TV!
Get over 3000 Stations.
Watch all your favorite shows on your Computer!

Hi: I wonder if someone could provide some insight into the following:
I would like to form a function f(x)=y based upon a set of pairs (x,y)
in M, where M = X x Y; ie, f(x)=y <-> (x,y) in M. Someone made the
comment: "f is not a function (for instance if x is an element of X,

I need help on a problem, please email me and i will provide the specifics. I
am afraid of getting caught so I don't want to reveal myself and would like
to use the private messagener thing or personal email. The problem derives
frome my basic logic book.

Cardinality of set x is defined by Von Neumann as: the least of all
ordinals bijectable to x.
Frege's definition of cardinality of x is that card x is the class of
all sets under equivalence relation bijection, or put in simple words:

The paradox that supposedly lurks in the sentence of "[t]his sentence
is not true" would only be a paradox if valid contradictory
conclusions could be drawn from the premisses of the syllogism that is
enthymematically implied in the sentence.

Who could explain the Aristotle's four propositions
(1) A belongs to all B;
(2) A belongs to no B;
(3) A belongs to some B and

ilost suddenly from my copuer

Size Theory:
Size Theory is an extension of  ZFC,
having two additional primitives:
 S ( denoting Size) which is a 1-place function symbole.