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...)
> > 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))
I gain no benefit by sharing..
if( if(t(S),f(R)) , if(t(R),f(S)) ).
if the sun's out then it's not raining
if it's raining then the sun's not out