On 10 Jun 2009, at 20:00, Brent Meeker wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jun 2009, at 02:20, Brent Meeker wrote:
I think Godel's imcompleteness theorem already implies that there
must
be non-unique extensions, (e.g. maybe you can add an axiom either
that
there are infinitely many
On 10 Jun 2009, at 20:17, Jesse Mazer wrote:
From: marc...@ulb.ac.be
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:03:26 +0200
On 10 Jun 2009, at 01:50, Jesse Mazer wrote:
Such an hypercomputer is just what Turing
As I said, you can formalize the notion of soundness in Set Theory. But
this adds nothing, except that it shows that the notion of soundness has
the same level of complexity that usual analytical or topological set
theoretical notions. So you can also say that unsound means violation
On 11 Jun 2009, at 14:48, A. Wolf wrote:
As I said, you can formalize the notion of soundness in Set
Theory. But
this adds nothing, except that it shows that the notion of
soundness has
the same level of complexity that usual analytical or topological
set
theoretical notions.
A. Wolf wrote:
As I said, you can formalize the notion of soundness in Set Theory. But
this adds nothing, except that it shows that the notion of soundness has
the same level of complexity that usual analytical or topological set
theoretical notions. So you can also say that unsound
5 matches
Mail list logo
