|
|
Re: If ZFC is a FORMAL THEORY ... then what is THEOREM 1 ?
Posted:
Oct 8, 2012 7:30 PM
|
|
On Oct 9, 6:54 am, George Greene <gree...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 5:48 pm, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > YOU SAID THE SET OF TRUTHS
> > ARE 'AUTOMATIC' AND NOT POSSIBLE TO DERIVE
> > FROM AN ALGORITHM.
>
> I *did*not*say* that, DUMBASS.
------8<-----------------------------
[HERC]
IF FOLtheorem(S) THEN ZFCtheorem(S)
is not algorithmic.
[GEORGE]
> It's MUCH BETTER than algorithmic, dumbass, it's AUTOMATIC.
> It's automatic BECAUSE classical logic IS MONOTONIC.
> It's automatic because (P-->Q) --> ((P&R)-->Q)
> IS A TAUTOLOGY.
> When we SAY that something is a theorem of pure/plain FOL,
> what we MEAN is that we can derive it, using THE INFERENCE RULES
--------------------------8<-------
So where are all these "automatic" theorems coming from
if they are not "algorithmic" in derivation.
Is there a Transitive Closure on Inference for all true Predicates
derived from P. Calculus?
What do you need ZFC for if Predicate Calculus _CALCULATES_
~E(R) XeR <-> ~(XeX)
Axiom Of SEPARATION deals with this already!
Herc
|
|
