Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:12:25 +0100
Jesse F. Hughes wrote about Jaynes' book:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
What is this link and why only 75 pages? Was it written before the book was completed?
No idea, but Chapter 15 on Paradoxes looks relevant. Particularly the subsection on finite vs. countable additivity.
Shame we don't have that text.
But his text on Goedel's theorem is a bit disappointing. [... snip ...]
I have to agree with that. And I'm affraid it's not the only place. How about this:
The set of rules and symbols that we have called "Boolean Algebra" is sometimes called "The Propositional Calculus." The term seems to be used only for the purpose of adding that we need also another set of rules and symbols called "The Predicate Calculus." However, these new symbols prove to be only abbreviations for short and familiar phrases. [ Duuhh ] The "Universal Quantifier" is only an abbreviation for "for all"; the "existential quantifier" is an abbreviation for "there is a." If we merely write our statements in plain English, we are using automatically all of the predicate calculus that we need for our purposes, and doing it more intelligibly. [ Huh? Why then _any_ formalization of logic? ]
Han de Bruijn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- References:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han . deBruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han . deBruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: cbrown
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: cbrown
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by Date: Transcendence degree of Coeff f
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading