On Jun 4, 5:19 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am asking for a formal definition of "reducing mathematics to > logic" (RMTL). In other words, a condition under which something can > be said to be RMTL if it meets that condition. But you simply refer > to some system and claim that it does RMTL without ever defining what > constitutes RMTL. References to philosophy and other people's words > do not constitute a statement of a formal definition of what you are > accomplishing. It simply gives you a (fake) excuse for saying > whatever you want and making claims about it, without ever giving a > precise definition of what you supposedly accomplished. > > Here's a discourse of mathematics: "To bisect an angle, place the > point of a compass on its vertex, draw 2 arcs that intersect within > the angle, use a straightedge to draw a line connecting the vertex to > that intersection, and that line bisects the angle." Isn't that > mathematics? But you can't right here reduce that to logic, can you? >
Yes it can be done.
"For every set M of mathematical statements there is a logical theory L where M is interpretable in L".