On May 29, 7:00 am, c...@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) wrote: > > EXISTS(x) > > > there exists something. > > That seems to me to be the most absolute of the non-absolutes. It can be > taken as the foundation by which all other near-absolutes can be measured. >
Yes I think of it as a STEP 1 or FACT 1
When we solve for an equation we say
EXIST(x) x+1 = 6
If we INVENTED A DISTINCT WORD
ESIST(x) x+1 = 6
where is the problem?
You call all sentences in language NON_ABSOLUTES
We call them CONCEPTS
IF THE UNIVERSE RUNS TO A RULE SET
RULE-SET PHYSICAL-UNIVERSE a b <===> atoms gravity c d <===> me you ladders nail-polish z q
Things ESIST THINGS EXIST
What makes the PHYSICAL-UNIVERSE real and the RULE-SET Imaginary?
You don't have and can NEVER *prove* that Concepts are not absolute.
-- !PROOF(!Exist(Y) x e Y <-> P(x,Y)) <-> Exist(Y) x e Y <-> P(x,Y)
IF there is no proof that a set cannot exist via specification with a predicate P THEN that set exists (as a membership relation)