Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.



Re: A finite set of all naturals
Posted:
Aug 24, 2013 1:22 AM


Nam Nguyen wrote: > On 23/08/2013 1:46 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > >> >> The example I gave (odd(x) <> Ey[Sx=2*y]) is clearly positive according >> to the definition he gave. > > But by the same token, I've defined odd(x) in _two different_ classes > of languages: one in which odd(x) is positive, one in which odd(x) > is negative. > > End of the story.
And which of those languages are you using when writing about cGC? Why not define that language and define positive/negative for it? If positive/negative depend on the language and you won't specify it and stick to it, how can anyone make sense of your claims?
 Sorrow in all lands, and grievous omens. Great anger in the dragon of the hills, And silent now the earth's green oracles That will not speak again of innocence. David Sutton  Geomancies



