Re: Ballistic Theory, Progress report...Suitable for 5yo Kids


Androcles wrote:
> "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1128714861.714112.279680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> | Claim:
> | If Androcles were in Norway, he would break up into
> | droplets of mercury.
> |
> | Proof:
> | Androcles does not break up into droplets of mercury,
> | therefore Androcles is not in Norway. That's a fact.
>
> Correct. Well done, tusselad.
> I'm not sure that your proposition is true, but it is certainly
> valid. You are learning well from me.

So valid but false is a possibility? :-)
Don't think so.

Either I have proven my claim:
"If Androcles were in Norway, he would break
up into droplets of mercury."
to be true, or I have proven nothing because
the proof you taught me is logically wrong.

> | So you better stay away from Norway, Androcles.
>
> I have no intention of visiting Norway, we are unable
> to test your hypothesis. Likewise we are unable
> to test mine, the moon not being fluid.

Why would we have to test our claims, when we
both have proven them to be true with logical
necessity, Androcles?

Does that mean that there is a possibility that
your claim:
"If the Moon were a fluid
it would break apart like droplets of mercury."
is false?

But if your claim may be false, what did you then prove
with your contrapositive:
"The moon does not break up into droplets of mercury,
therefore the moon is not fluid. That's a fact."

You have confused your poor, stupid pupil, Androcles.
Would you please clear it up?
Did you, or did you not prove your claim about the Moon
to be true?

> However, your claim that Algol is a binary system is not compatible
> with your claim the K2 is an accretion disk that occults
> the light of the B8 and bounces off the surface of the B8.

I think you better look up what I claimed, Androcles.
You got it wrong - again!

Paul

.

Relevant Pages