```Date: Nov 1, 2012 5:00 AM
Author: Hercules ofZeus
Subject: Re: CANTORS PROOF IS JUST THE INDUCTIVE STEP!

On Nov 1, 6:37 pm, William Elliot <ma...@panix.com> wrote:> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Hercules ofZeus wrote:> > > > INDUCTION RULE:>> > > > P(1) & P(n)->P(S(n))> > > > --> ALL(n) P(n)>> > > You're wrong. The induction rule is:> > > P(1) & ALL(n)(P(n) -> P(S(n))) -> ALL(n) P(n).>> > OK, in my new logic forall is variable function that uses the double> > instantiaion rule.>> > p(1) ^ N(p(N)->p(s(N))> > -> N(p(N))>> What's N?>> > CAPS = VARIABLES>> CAPS is a variable?>> > lower = terms / function terms.>> > i.e. the scope of N(...) is wider than the same variable name> > (...N...)>> Huh?>> > Just my new high order logic syntax forwww.microPROLOG.com!>> Wow, a high order of junk logic.>Hey if you don't like the final frontier in mathematics..   p(1) ^ N(p(N)->p(s(N))   -> N(p(N))I gain no benefit by sharing..Herc--www.microPROLOG.comif( if(t(S),f(R)) , if(t(R),f(S)) ).    if the sun's out then it's not rainingergo       if it's raining then the sun's not out
```