Math Forum / Mathematics / Mathematical Logic / November 2008

Here:
http://www.amazon.com/Classical-Propositional-Operators-Exercise-Foundations/dp/
0198531737/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1228044951&sr=1-1
we read that the reading level of Krister Segerberg's Classical
Propositional Operators: An Exercise in the Foundations of Logic is

The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, Earth, effective always
(www.grishenkoff.com)

If we have p(alpha) = omega + alpha, for ordinals alpha,
then the fixed points of p are:
omega^2, omega^2 +1, ...
and the fixed points of

INTRODUCTION
Alright, let us get going.
Mathematics is a subset of Physics, because Physics explains math and
why there is math.

Alright, I am going to stop with the preliminaries of this preface and
dive into the book itself.
I could probably spend the next months on the preliminaries and to fix
and consolidate

I will resume discussions in Special Relativity from where I left
off.  Here we analyze the properties of space-time as proposed by
Einstein.  I start of with a definition of terminologies.  This will
assure unambiguity in discussing the fundamental basis of reality

     I have some conflicts about terminlogies related to First order
Logic. The way I understand things, it seems that consistency is same
as having a model. So, if L is a model of ZF then ZF is consistent
isn't it?.

On page 13 of Takeuti & Zaring's 'Introduction To Axiomatic Set
Theory' we read [here, I'm using 'P' for the greek letter phi]:
"Those sets {x | P(x)}, for which P(x) has no free variables other
than x we call definable sets.

I will use pi to draw a useful distinction between the approximate and
the non-discrete.
DISCUSSION
Pi is not discreet and so cannot have an "approximate value" or a "fixed

Is it possible for there to be 'givens'?
Surely propositional logic is useful when we can conceive of a given
proposition being true or false. What if there were such things as
phrases in general, which range from having 1 possible value to a

the australian philosopher colin leslie dean points out the axioms of se
theory are inconsistent as shown by the skolem paradox
G. Frege say
"PLEEEEZZE present a

Let N be the set of natural numbers (ordinals) which is guaranteed to
exist by the axiom of infinity. Let P(N) be the powerset of N, which
is guaranteed to exist by the axiom of power set. Let Q denote the
empty set.

In mathematics we are used to solve equations. In logic (http://koti.
24.fi/prolog/) we can also write equations and solve them. An example.
Socrates (s) is a human being (h) and x. It follows that socrates is
mortal (m).

Hi all. Since I am about holding a talk about Recursion I chose
Fibonacci-numbers as a subtopic. I know that there is no explicit form
for the nth fibonacci number. Then I wondered whether that applied to
Tribonacci- (and n-bonacci-)numbers. I googled and came across the

The negation of everything poses a problem. For the things it supposes
to negate should, by the grammar of negation, present another thing in
its place. Yet, we suppose that with the disappearance of anything that
could be presented, nothing shall remain. Faced with this impasse, ...