Prev: 3SAT - CNF to CNF Conversion
Next: Program automatically Solves Sudoku
From: Daryl McCullough on 5 Apr 2010 08:02
cplxphil says...

>One other thing though...what if I constructed a sentence like
>this?...
>
>S = "~Provable('S') and ~Provable('For all sentences T, (T<--
>>Provable(T))-->S')"
>
>Why doesn't that express soundness?

If you could quantify over sentences, then you could express
soundness as:

Forall T, Provable(T) -> T

But you can't quantify over sentences, only over *codes* for
sentences, where a code is a natural number.

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

From: tchow on 5 Apr 2010 10:42
In article <Fieun.137544$0N3.53749(a)newsfe09.iad>,
Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
>Sure. Just call posts you don't like to hear as "hilarious" and leave.

On the contrary, I love your posts. What would USENET be like without
people like you? It's what keeps me coming back for more.

>What's really new about your response anyway? (I've seen that a few times
>in the past already).

There is nothing new under the sun.
--
Tim Chow tchow-at-alum-dot-mit-dot-edu
The range of our projectiles---even ... the artillery---however great, will
never exceed four of those miles of which as many thousand separate us from
the center of the earth. ---Galileo, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences
From: tchow on 5 Apr 2010 10:43
In article <Sneun.137545$0N3.52566(a)newsfe09.iad>,
Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
>I also think it's a kind of "entertainment" to listen to an Inquisition
>voice and attitude in modern days, as we're living in!

I'm glad to be able to give back something where I have received so much.
--
Tim Chow tchow-at-alum-dot-mit-dot-edu
The range of our projectiles---even ... the artillery---however great, will
never exceed four of those miles of which as many thousand separate us from
the center of the earth. ---Galileo, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences
From: glird on 8 Apr 2010 15:50
On Apr 4, 6:53 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote
a lot of things.

Since you are obviously quite intelligent, why do you hide behind
pot shots instead of arguing directly for or against given issues?

If you do, you will be welcome regardless of which side of the
argument you choose to be on.

glird
From: spudnik on 8 Apr 2010 20:08
isn't it clear?... ignore Lord Berty and his paralinguistic BS --
and,
perhaps, that whole God-am school ... and Scroedinger's joke-cat!

> pot shots instead of arguing directly for or against given issues?

thus:
this is not at all so, although it is quite true
of the glaciers that are coastal-er, which also have
the longest records. S. Fred Singer did a great metastudy
of this whole area; how about that --
"Hey; didn't he do taht for an oil company !?!"

> Public knows all about melting ice. Glaciers at Glacier park are

thus:
all things being equal (in the Quaternary Period, although
they never are), it could already be on. yes,
there is a remote possibility of creating a run-away glass house, but
not with the current pile of GCMware (the ad hoc nature of it,
puts it too close to the real data,
which shows no "overall warming") !!

thus:
you need four spatial cooordinates for barycentric calculutions
in space; however, they are not orthogonal. I'm not much
with algebra, but I do know that it is. NB:
a gyrocompass with three independent axes can
have a locked condition, or what ever it's called; four axes
avoids this & is done in practice ... but
I don't know just how much. perhaps,
many industries rely on typical operating conditions
to avoid such a configureation & go with three ... really,
you only need two, with the pivoted connection
to the fuselage, but that could
be ultimately more problematic, I'm sure.

thus:
your aether does not appear to have any relation
to what de Broglie wrote -- his bare inkling
of an initial realization in playing with some math;
dyscuss!

thus quoth:
the 200-pound space suit was added to the weight of the
astronaut, the gravitational load on the skeletal system
could prevent serious bone loss.
But for those who were not outside the spacecraft,
some reconditioning was necessary, after long stays on
http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/

> The 'particle' occupies a very small region of the aether wave.

thus:
there is no fourth axis that is orthogonal
to the three orthogonal axes of space (at least,
not at the same origin, and probably not at all isometric).
> The best model uses the minimum number of orthogonals

thus:
cartesianism can be problematic, but that does not
make the L-transformation into its antimatter ...
unless you throw Schroedinger's joke-cat from the train --
y'know, the Doppler effect?
you *can* "do" special & general relativity in trilinear
coordinates, but
you don't have to!... like, that is what Minkowski's phase-space is,
essentially; esp. with quaternions.

thus:
also, apply the formularium to an actual glass house, say,
at a particular lattitude (south of the equator,
you won;t always be able to use Polaris .-)

thus:
c^2 is a great constant to work with;
how do you feel about C^2 seconds-per-meter^2 ??

actually c times the second-root of two has already been
used as a factor, by Weber & in a very elementary exposition (or,
it is supposed to be, in German).

thnks for the prima donna soto voce;
that really means a lot to me ... zzzz.

now, I say, "second root" and second-power, because
it has nothing in oarticular to do with The Tetragon. (well,
may haps, the *skew* tetragon .-)

thus:
detrend this; all gasses are glass house gasses, but
not at the same window of opening or closing.
if you're going to use the Farmer's Almanac for a one-year
futures,
that's fine with me but I don't care!... I, myself etc. can't do the
math,
except in tripolars ... when I can configure them!

--Light: A History!
http://wlym.com
http://21stcenturysciencetech.com
http://white-smoke.wetpaint.com
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: 3SAT - CNF to CNF Conversion
Next: Program automatically Solves Sudoku