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: 1,523
Registered: 1/8/12
Re: CANTORS PROOF IS JUST THE INDUCTIVE STEP!
Posted: Nov 1, 2012 5:13 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 forwww.microPROLOG.com!
> > Wow, a high order of junk logic.
>
> Hey if you don't like the final frontier in mathematics..
>

Will this be the your final affrontier of mathematics?

> p(1) ^ N(p(N)->p(s(N))
> -> N(p(N))
>
> I gain no benefit by sharing..
>

'Cause you've nothing to share.

But if you really do need a friend with benefits,
should I benefit you my blocking your posts
instead of beamusing myself at your expense?



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.