Date: Apr 6, 2013 4:10 AM
Author: namducnguyen
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 06/04/2013 1:29 AM, Virgil wrote:
> In article <A2P7t.14440$yV1.13813@newsfe29.iad>,
> Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca> wrote:

>> What do you mean by "positive naturals", "usual forms", "possible"?
>> That's way too "intuitive" to conclude anything definitely, right?

>
> The naturals nowadays can either include zero or not, and zero is not a
> positive natural.
>
> Are you really not familiar with the usual forms of addition and
> multiplication as they are understood for natural numbers?


Let's see. Axy[x+y=y+x] is also true in modulo arithmetic. But yes,
I think the naturals would have that property too. But I'm
not familiar with the naturals in the sense their addition and
multiplication leave a choice between being true and false for cGC.

Since you seem to know the naturals better than I, would you be able
to tell me which choice of truth value you'd choose for cGC?

If you can't, what are you talking about "familiar with the usual
forms of addition and multiplication as they are understood for
natural numbers"?

You don't know the truth value of cGC and you'd claim you're
familiar with the natural numbers? _That doesn't sound logical_ !


--
----------------------------------------------------
There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.

NYOGEN SENZAKI
----------------------------------------------------