Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
ALL(F):N->R is 2OL! NOT 1OL!!!!!!
Replies:
6
Last Post:
Nov 15, 2012 2:39 AM
|
 |
|
|
|
Re: ALL(F):N->R is 2OL! NOT 1OL!!!!!!
Posted:
Nov 14, 2012 10:12 PM
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
