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: ALL(F):N->R is 2OL! NOT 1OL!!!!!!
Replies: 6   Last Post: Nov 15, 2012 2:39 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Graham Cooper

Posts: 4,273
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: ALL(F):N->R is 2OL! NOT 1OL!!!!!!
Posted: Nov 14, 2012 10:12 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Nov 15, 10:47 am, George Greene <gree...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 3:28 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > Why are you citing ZFC to prove Cantor's proof 1 day and FOL the next?
>
> You are being REALLY stupid, Herc.
> ZFC *is* a FIRST-order theory.


WIKIPEDIA

For example, the second-order sentence
A(P) A(x) ( xeP v ~xeP )
says that for every set P of individuals and every individual x,
either x is in P or it is no

FOR EVERY SET P - 2ND ORDER YOU BUFFOON!

2nd ORDER is how AXIOMS ARE WRITTEN to RANGE OVER THE THEORY IT
PRODUCES.

You can't state 1 singlie fact about 1OL or 2OL without CONVULATING
THE CHARADE furhter and further in to lies and denial.

You NEVER USE 2OL - That's the SMOKING GUN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT!

Herc



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.