Date: Feb 11, 2013 1:43 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots
On Feb 10, 11:11 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

> In article

> <c7249ee8-e019-43bf-8ce9-2a2099b91...@l13g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> > On 9 Feb., 17:36, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > the arguments are yours

> > > > > and the statements are yours-

>

> > > > Of course. But the wrong interpretation is yours.

>

> > > How does one interpret

> > > we have shown m does not exist

> > > (your statement)

>

> > > to mean that

>

> > > m might still exist

>

> > > ?

>

> > TND is invalid in the infinite.

>

> As far as the vast majority of mathematics and mathematicians is

> concerned, Tertium Non Datur is valid everywhere.

>

> Those who claim otherwise do not speak for the vast majority of

> mathematics and mathematicians but at most for a miniscule minority.

> --

Here the excluded middle is not relevant. We know that

P := there exists a natural number m

is false. It does not matter how many truth

values P can have, we know which one we have.

The excluded middle would only be relevant if we were trying

to obtain P true from ~~P true or P false

from ~~~P true. Here we are obtaining ~P true

from ~P true