Re: decidable fragments of first order logic?

On Nov 26, 10:37 am, Jan Burse <janbu...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ace0f_5pades schrieb:





Oh well, seems SOE interperative was on the cards... yet if that were
true, then why not Counter R((exist true_R) Nand R^2); and Counter
R((exist true_R) lor R^2). The later being attached to atleast one
postitive statement for states residue from R^2.

It is in truth, R^2 is unable to be inversed as elemential quantities
alter during the course of time. consider Y-->residueY'(R/I)

Only under true_R are terms truely inversable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

or am I wrong,

is it the case exist_R^2<->exist true_R?

NO
cause that would then contradict n+1 isnot =l

Plus stop posting unrelated stuff to my response you ugly ***.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what?

The only ugly response is yours. the relationship is proven and
known.

FOL came from exist_true R,

there's no contradiction there.
.