The Math Forum

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: when indecomposability is decomposable
Replies: 4   Last Post: Feb 21, 2013 8:51 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz

Posts: 3,473
Registered: 12/4/04
Re: when indecomposability is decomposable
Posted: Feb 17, 2013 11:03 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In <>, on 02/15/2013
at 11:02 PM, fom <> said:

>When one invokes the axiom,




>there is an ontological interpretation of the
>sign of equality corresponding with the sense
>of indecomposability.

I don't see how it is either omtological or indecomposable. The
inference is valid regardless of how you model "=".

>Of course, mathematicians generally do not know
>of description theory.

Is that true? I'd buy the claim that for most mathematicians it is not
relevant to their sphere of interest.

>That is, when one presupposes
>the ontological interpretation that gives
>rise to the necessity of
>|- (x=y -> Az(zex <-> zey))

Isn't that a special case of a more general axiom schema? For any
propositional function P of two variables, |- (x=y -> Az(P)z,x) >->

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to

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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.