Date: Mar 25, 2013 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On 24 Mrz., 23:10, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> In article
> WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> > On 24 Mrz., 16:13, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 24, 4:03 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> > > Induction proves that every
> > > True
> > > and all
> > > False
> > So you do no longer adhere to ZFC+FOPL?
> ZFC+FOPL? does no support WM's alleged proofs, whether by induction or
> any other method.
What axioms are mis-applied? You can find the axioms here:
> > There a proof "for every" is a proof "for all".
> Induction only proves
> "For every member of some inductive set" and "for all members of that
> inductive set"
Obviously, the FISONs form an inductive set.
And no difference between "all" and "every".
> > Unfortunately current
> > logic does not distinguish.
> Logic does,
Above you wrote the contrary.
Your memory seems very unreliable.