Whoa dude we have been having a friendly conversation and now you're tossing insults. Apparently you're not capable of making a substantive response. Have a nice life.

## Search found 334 matches

- Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:19 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Foundations of Mathematics.
- Replies:
**21** - Views:
**1152**

- Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:37 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Foundations of Mathematics.
- Replies:
**21** - Views:
**1152**

### Re: Foundations of Mathematics.

"The symbols and the relationships between them and the processes by which theorems can be generated can all be specified by axioms that are presented without foundation or even validation." The axioms and the rules of inference ARE the foundations. That's what A. Seagull is confused about. If you h...

- Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:09 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

If I'm understanding you, you seem to be arguing a formalist position in which the axioms are not necessarily true about the world. But nobody is disagreeing with you. Not me, anyway. I still don't understand whether you wish to do math without agreeing that 5 = 5. There is still the expectation tha...

- Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:07 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

I don't question that 5=5, I only question what some people seem to think it means and what its foundations are. Ok. Well for the sake of discussion, this is an interesting discussion! I was put on to the law of identity on this very forum, perhaps a year or more ago. Someone posed the following su...

- Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:23 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

So you may not assume that something is equal to itself without noting that that is an assumption. In any case what is meant be 'equal'? It is rather undefined. I can't tell if you're serious or just trolling me out of boredom. If I say that 5 = 5, is this something you would question? I'm just try...

- Sat Sep 16, 2017 6:01 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

Such 'laws of logic' are not laws at all. At best they are hypotheses. It may be a basic principle of logic but it is not 'prior' to maths. Pure maths makes no use of such vague statements. Really? In math we may not assume a thing is equal to itself? Perhaps you can provide a reference or expand o...

- Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:32 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

- Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:30 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

Nothing can stop us from doing math. And there's that big troublemaker "nothing" again, preventing us from doing math!! Only ourselves can prevent, or stop, us from doing maths. Is that somewhat better? Odysseus told the Cyclops that his name was Noman. Later when Osysseus poked the Cyclops in the ...

- Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:13 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?
- Replies:
**23** - Views:
**348**

### Re: Did I discover “Angelo Cannata’s paradox”?

The law of identity is a basic principle of logic. It's logically prior to math. It's not an axiom of any system of math. "A thing is equal to itself" is a principle of reasoning independent of math. Of course what this means in the real world is murky. We know that the molecules in our body are con...

- Sun Aug 13, 2017 4:15 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: help understanding Negation Introduction
- Replies:
**17** - Views:
**410**

### Re: help understanding Negation Introduction

First, does the forum offer some way to type the symbols used in symbolic logic? Negation Introduction |............| P____ |............| |............| Q |............| |............| ~Q | |....... ~P You can line these up with the code tag. It's the </> button on the formatting palette above the...

- Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:30 am
- Forum: Philosophy of Mind
- Topic: The Inter Mind
- Replies:
**243** - Views:
**6053**

### Re: The Inter Mind

The whole motivation for what I say comes from looking at what Science says about Consciousness. Scientists are determined to prove that Consciousness is an illusion created by the Brain. They say quite arrogantly that there is nothing but the material Brain. Isn't this a little strawman-ish? I'm s...

- Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:10 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Science
- Topic: BRIEF HISTORY of SYMMETRY and ASYMMETRY. / by Socratus /
- Replies:
**2** - Views:
**236**

- Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:34 am
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: What 3.5 dimensions means to me
- Replies:
**1** - Views:
**118**

### Re: What 3.5 dimensions means to me

There's a well-developed theory of fractal dimension . The Wiki writeup is pretty clear. Imagine a line or a curve traveling through the plane. It has topological dimension 2. The plane itself has dimension 2. I hope we all agree on that. You've heard of those space filling curves that are lines tha...

- Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:53 am
- Forum: Philosophy of Mind
- Topic: The Inter Mind
- Replies:
**243** - Views:
**6053**

### Re: The Inter Mind

The smallest number will not be an Infinitesimal it will be a single number in a class all by itself. It will have certain properties that Infinitesimals do not have, like dx / 2 = 0. But really it should be dx / n = 0. Probably for all n except maybe where n = Gx, the largest number. What other pr...

- Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:06 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Mind
- Topic: The Inter Mind
- Replies:
**243** - Views:
**6053**

### Re: The Inter Mind

I know exactly what you mean about dx / 2. Since dx * dx = 0 for the Infinitesimals then maybe for the smallest Infinitesimal dx / 2 = 0. It seems like the smallest number will have that property. It's no worse than dx * dx = 0. There is no smallest infinitesimal. It's a mathematical fact. I don't ...