Date: Apr 6, 2013 2:27 PM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 6 Apr., 19:53, Nam Nguyen <namducngu...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> On 06/04/2013 11:38 AM, WM wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > On 6 Apr., 19:23, Nam Nguyen <namducngu...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> >> In details:
>
> >> We do have the logical equivalence:
>
> >> ~Ax[P(x)] <-> Ex[~P(x)]
>
> >> But we don't have this equivalence:
>
> >> ~P(SS.....S0) <-> Ex[~P(x)].
>
> >> Right?
>
> > No. Unless SS...S0 is fixed it is the same as x for x in |N. Different
> > notation does not make different meaning.

>
> It was just unclear to you. In my presentation above SS.....S0 is
> a _fixed_ constant, _not_ a variable.


Every counterexample of GC, if existing, is a fixed natural number.
But I do not pretend that I know such an SS...S0. And that statement
with, say 42, does not play a role in my arguing.
>
~GC <==> Counter example with a fixed n in |N exists. <==>
Fixed n in |N can be found. ==> Goldbach conjecture is decidable.

Regards, WM