Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: CANTORS PROOF IS JUST THE INDUCTIVE STEP!
Replies: 6   Last Post: Nov 1, 2012 5:31 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
William Elliot

Posts: 1,551
Registered: 1/8/12
Re: CANTORS PROOF IS JUST THE INDUCTIVE STEP!
Posted: Nov 1, 2012 4:37 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Hercules ofZeus wrote:

> > > INDUCTION RULE:
> >
> > > P(1) & P(n)->P(S(n))
> > > --> ALL(n) P(n)

> >
> > You're wrong.  The induction rule is:
> > P(1) & ALL(n)(P(n) -> P(S(n))) -> ALL(n) P(n).

>
> OK, in my new logic forall is variable function that uses the double
> instantiaion rule.
>


> p(1) ^ N(p(N)->p(s(N))
> -> N(p(N))
>

What's N?

> CAPS = VARIABLES

CAPS is a variable?

> lower = terms / function terms.
>
> i.e. the scope of N(...) is wider than the same variable name
> (...N...)
>

Huh?

> Just my new high order logic syntax for www.microPROLOG.com!

Wow, a high order of junk logic.



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.