sci.logic (date)

sci.logic (date)

[Thread Index] [Top] [All Lists]

November 30, 2005

Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Alan Crowe, 15:40
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Aatu Koskensilta, 15:28
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Torkel Franzen, 15:23
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Chris Menzel, 14:48
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Torkel Franzen, 14:26
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Scott, 14:07
Re: Turing and Godel, Torkel Franzen, 09:31
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, David C . Ullrich, 08:10
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 06:53
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 06:07
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 06:06
stuck up in one simple problem, chander.prb@xxxxxxxxx, 03:03
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 02:27
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Ross A. Finlayson, 01:57

November 29, 2005

Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Stephen Harris, 23:43
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Stephen Harris, 22:44
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 22:25
Re: Turing and Godel, Rupert, 22:06
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 21:59
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 21:35
Turing and Godel, Mark-T, 20:24
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Scott, 19:58
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, anamax, 19:32
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 18:37
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 18:31
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 14:19
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Pascal Bourguignon, 12:10
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 11:50
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 11:14
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 10:48
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 10:16
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 09:54
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 08:33
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, David C . Ullrich, 07:07
Re: analytic function... need help., David C . Ullrich, 07:03
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Aatu Koskensilta, 06:26
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, William Elliot, 06:17
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 00:48
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 00:18
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Jonathan Hoyle, 00:07

November 28, 2005

Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 22:40
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 20:36
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Bhartrhari, 18:50
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Jonathan Hoyle, 18:34
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 18:10
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 18:09
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 17:57
Re: Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, logic-lurker, 16:11
a logic, a model, an isomorphism, an intention, mitch, 16:00
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Coby Beck, 15:15
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Ross A. Finlayson, 14:57
Re: minimal element iff maximal element: how to prove?, MoeBlee, 14:53
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Jonathan Hoyle, 14:30
Help writing a paper on Godel's Incompleteness Thorem, Scott, 14:14
Re: analytic function... need help., Lee Rudolph, 14:14
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 13:44
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 12:56
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 12:12
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 12:11
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 12:10
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 12:03
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 06:56
Re: analytic function... need help., David C . Ullrich, 06:37
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 05:55
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 02:47
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 02:38
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 02:14
Re: minimal element iff maximal element: how to prove?, Chris Menzel, 02:06
Re: question about categoricity, Torkel Franzen, 02:01
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 01:53
minimal element iff maximal element: how to prove?, MoeBlee, 00:14
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Ross A. Finlayson, 00:14

November 27, 2005

Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 22:55
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 22:22
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Jonathan Hoyle, 22:16
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 22:07
**theory-edge** mailing list, vznuri, 20:52
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 19:32
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 17:31
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 17:29
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 16:45
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 16:21
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 16:11
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 16:09
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 16:05
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 15:51
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 15:37
Re: question about categoricity, Torkel Franzen, 15:36
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 15:32
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 15:12
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 15:11
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 15:01
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 14:46
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 14:46
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 14:37
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 14:36
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 14:35
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, George Dance, 14:31
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 14:24
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 14:22
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 14:17
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, G . Frege, 14:12
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 14:08
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 13:50
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 13:46
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 13:22
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 13:19
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 13:11
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 13:02
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 13:02
Re: Natural deduction?, George Dance, 13:02
Re: Natural deduction?, George Dance, 12:29
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 12:17
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 11:26
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 10:24
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 10:07
Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, Frederick Williams, 10:07
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 09:51
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 09:33
Re: analytic function... need help., Lee Rudolph, 09:13
Einstein's 'dark energy"., caesarjbsquitti, 08:45
Re: analytic function... need help., David C . Ullrich, 07:49
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 07:02
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Stephen Harris, 06:01
Are Logicians Naturally Logical?, William Elliot, 05:19
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 05:17
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 03:26
Re: question about categoricity, Torkel Franzen, 03:00
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 01:48
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 01:41

November 26, 2005

Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 23:41
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 23:40
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 23:34
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 23:28
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 23:16
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 23:11
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 22:47
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 22:38
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 22:19
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 22:01
Re: Natural deduction?, George Dance, 21:57
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 21:54
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 21:37
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 21:36
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 21:23
Re: analytic function... need help., curtispro, 21:23
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 20:58
Re: analytic function... need help., curtispro, 20:42
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 19:53
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 19:49
Re: Help with a problem, Robert Zimmerman, 16:25
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 14:48
Re: conditional statement v.s. conditional probability?, Miler, 14:35
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 12:19
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 11:20
Re: Universe Does Have An "Outside", nobody40, 11:09
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Aatu Koskensilta, 11:04
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 10:55
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 09:13
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 08:54
Re: analytic function... need help., David C . Ullrich, 07:57
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 06:19
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 03:38
Re: Help with a problem, Robert Zimmerman, 00:24
Re: question about categoricity, Torkel Franzen, 00:15

November 25, 2005

Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 22:42
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 22:05
Re: Natural deduction?, George Dance, 21:36
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 21:24
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 21:15
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 21:12
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 19:35
Re: Help with a problem, Robert Zimmerman, 19:32
Re: conditional statement v.s. conditional probability?, david petry, 19:25
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 18:24
analytic function... need help., curtispro, 18:18
UCLA Logic Colloquium, Dec 2, H. Enderton, 17:54
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Stephen Harris, 12:54
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 11:18
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 11:05
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 10:50
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 10:43
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 10:25
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 10:21
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:52
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:51
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:50
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:22
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:10
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 09:04
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 08:47
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 08:43
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 08:40
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 07:38
Re: Natural deduction?, George Dance, 07:25
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 07:18
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 06:22
Re: conditional statement v.s. conditional probability?, Barb Knox, 05:59
conditional statement v.s. conditional probability?, littlebeam, 03:44
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 01:19
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 00:17

November 24, 2005

Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 23:47
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 21:42
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 21:16
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 21:09
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 20:36
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 20:29
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 20:01
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 19:48
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 19:45
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 19:43
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 19:16
Re: "|-" and proofs, Daryl McCullough, 19:13
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 19:01
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 18:43
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 18:36
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 18:05
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 17:21
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 17:16
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 17:13
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 13:58
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 11:58
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 11:40
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 11:13
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 10:56
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 10:16
Re: "|-" and proofs, paul_bostonjp, 08:23
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 07:32
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 07:30
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 07:16
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 06:59
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 06:56
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 06:40
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 06:36
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 06:22
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 06:17
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 06:07
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 06:06
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 06:03
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 06:02
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 05:49
Re: "|-" and proofs, Aatu Koskensilta, 04:41
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 03:48
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Aatu Koskensilta, 02:56
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:26

November 23, 2005

Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 23:46
Re: Help with a problem, George Dance, 23:46
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 23:43
Re: "|-" and proofs, G . Frege, 23:40
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 23:35
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 23:20
Re: Help with a problem, G . Frege, 23:17
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 22:58
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 22:41
Re: Help with a problem, Torkel Franzen, 22:41
Re: Help with a problem, William Elliot, 22:36
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 22:15
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 20:23
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 19:03
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 18:57
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 18:41
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 18:35
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Robert Low, 18:02
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 17:58
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 17:34
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Chris Menzel, 17:13
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Robert Low, 16:53
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 16:09
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Chris Menzel, 15:53
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Robert Low, 15:31
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 15:00
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 14:57
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Chris Menzel, 14:52
Re: Well Ordering the Reals, Robert Low, 14:38
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Aatu Koskensilta, 14:29
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 14:04
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 11:55
Re: =, george, 11:40
Re: question about categoricity, george, 11:31
Re: complete theory of Rationals, m s, 11:16
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 11:15
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 09:17
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 09:12
Re: "|-" and proofs, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 09:12
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 09:10
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 09:01
Re: "|-" and proofs, Daryl McCullough, 08:46
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 08:40
Re: "|-" and proofs, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 08:38
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 08:27
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 07:55
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 07:22
Re: "|-" and proofs, Daryl McCullough, 07:01
Re: Help with a problem, Robert Zimmerman, 06:29
Re: complete theory of Rationals, William Elliot, 05:32
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 05:01
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 04:55
Re: complete theory of Rationals, Torkel Franzen, 04:54
Re: complete theory of Rationals, William Elliot, 04:53
Re: complete theory of Rationals, m s, 03:21
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 02:20
Re: "|-" and proofs, G . Frege, 01:58
Re: "|-" and proofs, G . Frege, 01:50
Re: complete theory of Rationals, William Elliot, 01:45
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 01:45
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 01:44
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 01:43
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 01:30
Re: complete theory of Rationals, Torkel Franzen, 01:29
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 01:27
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 01:18
Re: complete theory of Rationals, m s, 01:17
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 01:15
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 01:05
Re: complete theory of Rationals, Torkel Franzen, 01:02
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 00:54
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 00:53
complete theory of Rationals, m s, 00:51
Re: Help with a problem, Chris Menzel, 00:17
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 00:01

November 22, 2005

Help with a problem, Robert Zimmerman, 23:49
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 23:30
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 23:03
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 22:55
Re: first order model theory question, Torkel Franzen, 22:33
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 22:15
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 19:20
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 19:18
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 19:12
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 18:05
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 18:02
Re: question about categoricity, Per Freem, 17:08
Re: question about categoricity, Chris Menzel, 15:16
Re: "|-" and proofs, MoeBlee, 14:45
Re: first order model theory question, MoeBlee, 14:25
Re: first order model theory question, MoeBlee, 14:20
question about categoricity, Per Freem, 14:05
Re: first order model theory question, Per Freem, 13:53
Re: first order model theory question, Per Freem, 13:51
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 13:38
Re: first order model theory question, Chris Menzel, 12:40
Re: first order model theory question, Torkel Franzen, 11:47
Re: first order model theory question, george, 11:42
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 11:30
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 09:58
Re: "|-" and proofs, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 09:46
Re: "|-" and proofs, G . Frege, 09:25
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 09:14
Re: "|-" and proofs, Daryl McCullough, 08:55
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 08:22
Re: "|-" and proofs, Aatu Koskensilta, 07:29
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 07:25
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 07:11
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 06:56
Re: "|-" and proofs, Torkel Franzen, 06:53
Re: first order model theory question, Torkel Franzen, 06:50
Re: "|-" and proofs, William Elliot, 05:43
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 05:40
"|-" and proofs, paul_bostonjp, 05:08
Re: first order model theory question, Chris Menzel, 02:57
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 01:26
Re: first order model theory question, Per Freem, 00:48
Re: first order model theory question, Rupert, 00:31
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 00:26

November 21, 2005

Re: Natural deduction?, Dan Christensen, 23:49
first order model theory question, Per Freem, 23:47
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 23:15
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 22:27
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 22:20
Re: Who is the Biggest BS-er in Computer Science? (Vote here!), David Ames, 20:46
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Barb Knox, 20:08
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, smnewberger, 19:42
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 18:32
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Jonathan Hoyle, 17:47
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 17:45
Re: Who is the Biggest BS-er in Computer Science? (Vote here!), porky_pig_jr@xxxxxxxxxxx, 15:26
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 15:25
Who is the Biggest BS-er in Computer Science? (Vote here!), Charlie-Boo, 14:30
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Aatu Koskensilta, 14:16
Re: Informal theories versus formal theories., Charlie-Boo, 14:06
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Charlie-Boo, 13:56
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Charlie-Boo, 13:18
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 13:17
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 13:02
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 12:58
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 12:50
Re: =, Charlie-Boo, 12:25
Re: Natural deduction?, Charlie-Boo, 12:12
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Aatu Koskensilta, 06:49
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 06:37
Re: ramified type theory, David C . Ullrich, 06:31
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, smnewberger, 06:19
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Aatu Koskensilta, 05:11
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 05:08
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 04:18
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 01:49
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 01:35
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 01:26
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 01:21
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 01:07

November 20, 2005

Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 21:52
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 21:49
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 21:21
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 20:56
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, G . Frege, 20:55
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 20:29
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, William Elliot, 20:26
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 20:08
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 19:30
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, G . Frege, 18:57
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 18:25
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 18:02
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Peter Webb, 18:00
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 16:36
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Chris Menzel, 15:11
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 15:06
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 15:03
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 13:29
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 13:21
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 13:17
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 11:55
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 11:47
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 11:41
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, William Elliot, 07:45
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 07:08
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 07:03
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 06:49
Re: Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, William Elliot, 06:28
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 06:09
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 06:05
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 05:07
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 04:15
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 03:32
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 00:57
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 00:52
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 00:45

November 19, 2005

Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 23:14
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Chris Menzel, 22:57
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 22:44
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 22:37
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 22:16
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 21:51
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 21:43
Finest partition - exercise in Suppes's book, MoeBlee, 21:35
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 21:28
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 20:09
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 18:00
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 12:28
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 12:02
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 11:39
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 10:47
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, george, 10:38
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Herman Jurjus, 07:13
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Aatu Koskensilta, 05:50
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Chris Menzel, 03:38
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 03:25
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 03:18

November 18, 2005

Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 23:05
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, H. Enderton, 22:36
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 22:20
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 21:51
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 21:33
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 21:20
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 20:59
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 19:58
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 18:40
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 18:07
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 18:01
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Mark Tarver, 17:27
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 17:20
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 17:12
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 17:02
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 16:52
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 16:49
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 16:42
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 16:27
Re: =, george, 15:54
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Helene . Boucher, 15:43
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 15:35
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 14:54
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Helene . Boucher, 13:55
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 12:56
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, abo, 12:20
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 11:31
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, David C . Ullrich, 08:26
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 08:26
Re: ramified type theory, David C . Ullrich, 08:19
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, abo, 07:27
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Aatu Koskensilta, 06:26
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Rupert, 05:55
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Rupert, 04:10
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Rupert, 04:03
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 03:55
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 02:33
Informal theories versus formal theories., Starbles, 01:56
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 01:44
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Starbles, 01:40
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Starbles, 01:35
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 01:14
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Starbles, 01:07
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Chris Menzel, 00:35
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 00:28
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 00:26
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 00:16
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 00:12
Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, MoeBlee, 00:02

November 17, 2005

Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 23:50
What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?, Nam Nguyen, 23:49
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 23:46
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 23:40
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 23:28
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 23:19
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 23:16
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 23:15
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 22:48
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 21:23
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 20:42
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 20:36
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Rupert, 19:16
Re: ramified type theory, Barb Knox, 18:13
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 17:48
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 17:39
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Starbles, 17:37
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, petersr1088, 17:01
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, MoeBlee, 16:55
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 16:49
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, H. Enderton, 15:58
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Daryl McCullough, 15:56
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Daryl McCullough, 15:50
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Helene . Boucher, 15:39
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Torkel Franzen, 15:29
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 15:18
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 15:04
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, MoeBlee, 14:58
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Daryl McCullough, 14:53
Re: ramified type theory, Daryl McCullough, 14:52
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Torkel Franzen, 14:41
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 14:32
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 14:29
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Helene . Boucher, 14:20
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 13:04
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 12:50
Re: Penrose vs the Robot, abo, 12:29
Re: tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, Daryl McCullough, 12:19
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 11:42
tedious sledding re set existence in FOL, george, 11:41
Penrose vs the Robot, Daryl McCullough, 10:24
Seminar by Richard Bornat on Separation Logic, 8 December 2005, 6pm, London, FACS FACTS Editor, 07:14
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 01:48
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 01:25
The Power of the Pixel; 5 Years of Advertising at Only a Fraction of the Normal Cost., walter . alex, 00:28

November 16, 2005

Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Iain McCracken, 22:56
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 20:37
Re: ramified type theory, Nam Nguyen, 20:35
Re: From Post to Penrose, george, 20:27
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 19:10
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 18:56
Re: From Post to Penrose, Rupert, 17:44
Re: ramified type theory, Rupert, 17:41
Re: ramified type theory, Rupert, 17:37
Re: ramified type theory, Nam Nguyen, 16:42
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 16:19
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 16:12
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 16:07
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 16:03
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 15:58
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 15:56
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 15:55
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 15:49
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 15:36
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 15:36
Re: ramified type theory, Nam Nguyen, 15:28
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 15:17
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 15:06
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 14:56
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 14:55
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 14:38
Re: ramified type theory, G . Frege, 14:23
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 13:52
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 13:34
Re: God is a paradox., georgie, 13:02
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Tom, 10:29
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, David C . Ullrich, 08:59
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Aatu Koskensilta, 06:49
Re: ramified type theory, Rupert, 03:05

November 15, 2005

Re: Natural deduction?, Dan Christensen, 23:57
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 23:38
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 23:17
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 23:09
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 23:04
Re: ramified type theory, Chris Menzel, 22:05
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Torkel Franzen, 21:27
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 21:21
Re: ramified type theory, Rupert, 19:20
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Aatu Koskensilta, 18:38
Re: Natural deduction?, Charlie-Boo, 17:48
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 17:22
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, H. Enderton, 15:22
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 14:47
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Tom, 14:43
Re: =, Charlie-Boo, 14:32
Re: Natural deduction?, Charlie-Boo, 14:05
Re: Natural deduction?, Charlie-Boo, 13:36
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Kaz Kylheku, 13:32
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 13:29
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:25
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:13
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:07
Re: God is a paradox., Charlie-Boo, 12:39
Re: God is a paradox., Charlie-Boo, 12:32
Re: ramified type theory, Owen, 11:58
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Charlie-Boo, 11:42
From Post to Penrose, Stephen Harris, 08:24
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, David C . Ullrich, 07:28
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, David Steuber, 03:55

November 14, 2005

Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Dan Christensen, 22:58
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 19:51
Tautology Elimination in Otter, Paul Sholtz, 17:30
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Chris Menzel, 15:34
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Tom Russ, 14:57
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Pascal Bourguignon, 14:47
Re: Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Cameron MacKinnon, 14:31
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Tom, 14:03
Notation of symbolic logic can be confusing!!! Computer-languages? LISP????, Daniel G. \"Govende\" McGrath, 14:01
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 12:40
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, David C . Ullrich, 08:21
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Tom, 07:01
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 05:29
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 04:34
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 03:57
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 03:55
Re: There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Starbles, 02:54
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 02:07

November 13, 2005

Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 18:12
i-C&P CONFERENCE -last call, Colin . Schmidt, 17:46
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Chris Menzel, 17:23
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, MoeBlee, 17:13
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 12:37
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 12:33
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 12:23
Re: =, george, 12:04
Re: =, george, 11:44
There can be no non-spatial proposition?, Tom, 10:25
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 09:18
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 08:48
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 08:34
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, David C . Ullrich, 07:48
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 04:46
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Barb Knox, 04:26
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 03:57
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Barb Knox, 03:24
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, �a\\/b, 02:45
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, �a\\/b, 02:45
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 02:42
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:36
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:10

November 12, 2005

Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, 18:03
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, computer, 17:12
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Chris Menzel, 16:14
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 13:39
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 08:33
Re: The reciprocal of zero isn't even infinity., David C . Ullrich, 08:03
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, David C . Ullrich, 07:56
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, computer, 07:45
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, G . Frege, 07:21
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, computer, 07:05
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 04:16
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 03:35
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 02:22
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 02:20
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 01:55
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 01:42
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 01:23

November 11, 2005

Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Rupert, 22:01
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 18:42
UCLA Logic Colloquium, Nov 18, H. Enderton, 17:00
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Chris Menzel, 16:25
Re: The reciprocal of zero isn't even infinity., Lee Rudolph, 15:53
Re: Venn Diagram of a Numerical Syllogism?, raydpratt, 15:15
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 13:19
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 13:17
Re: The reciprocal of zero isn't even infinity., Starbles, 12:31
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 10:59
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 10:55
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 10:41
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 10:21
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 10:06
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 09:52
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 09:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 08:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 08:34
Re: The reciprocal of zero isn't even infinity., David C . Ullrich, 08:25
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 04:11
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 03:56
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 03:53
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 03:34
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 03:22
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Jesse F. Hughes, 03:19
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 03:16
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 03:13
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 02:55
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Ross A. Finlayson, 02:44
The reciprocal of zero isn't even infinity., Starbles, 02:29
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 02:27
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 02:26
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 02:03
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 01:46
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 01:38
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:22
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 00:38
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Rupert, 00:15

November 10, 2005

Re: Godel's theorem is uninteresting?, ken.quirici@xxxxxxxxxx, 21:23
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Torkel Franzen, 20:26
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 20:22
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 19:58
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, zzbunker, 17:54
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 17:41
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 16:18
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, zzbunker, 16:06
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 16:05
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Charlie-Boo, 16:01
Re: Three Theorems of Godel, Jesse F. Hughes, 15:53
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 15:43
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 15:32
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 15:24
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 15:20
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 15:15
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 15:13
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 15:07
Re: Godel's theorem is uninteresting?, george, 15:03
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 15:02
Re: Stone's Theorem, george, 14:53
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 14:50
Three Theorems of Godel, Helene . Boucher, 14:45
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 14:44
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 14:13
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:56
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 13:51
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 13:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 13:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 13:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:48
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 13:46
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:25
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:08
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 13:05
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Charlie-Boo, 12:53
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 12:17
Re: The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, george, 12:02
Re: Godel's theorem is uninteresting?, Charlie-Boo, 11:58
Re: God is way beyond logic and reasoning, Charlie-Boo, 11:40
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 11:23
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 11:21
The MetaMathematical Theorem that Almost Was, Charlie-Boo, 10:21
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 09:28
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 08:55
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 07:10
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 07:08
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 06:44
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, David C . Ullrich, 06:22
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:53
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:38
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, sradhakr, 01:17
Godel's theorem is uninteresting?, ken.quirici@xxxxxxxxxx, 00:09

November 09, 2005

Re: Natural deduction?, Dan Christensen, 23:33
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 19:08
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 15:24
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, george, 13:50
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 13:21
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 13:04
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 12:54
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Daryl McCullough, 12:47
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 12:27
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 12:26
Re: Godel's theorem is invalid?, Torkel Franzen, 12:15
Godel's theorem is invalid?, LordBeotian, 12:11
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 10:58
Re: interpretation from english to predicate logic, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, 08:55
Re: Natural deduction?, G . Frege, 08:48
Re: Proof theoretical strength of induction up to epsilon-0, Aatu Koskensilta, 05:03
Natural deduction?, Torkel Franzen, 04:50
Re: proving transfinite induction in PA, Torkel Franzen, 04:40
Re: Proof theoretical strength of induction up to epsilon-0, Torkel Franzen, 04:31

November 08, 2005

Re: interpretation from english to predicate logic, Stephen Montgomery-Smith, 23:08
Re: logic on the web, MoeBlee, 21:58
Re: =, george, 16:55
interpretation from english to predicate logic, sikari . h, 16:13

November 07, 2005

Re: Intro book on Set Theory., Dan Christensen, 23:34
proving transfinite induction in PA, Rupert, 19:41
Proof theoretical strength of induction up to epsilon-0, Aatu Koskensilta, 17:56
Re: Intro book on Set Theory., Aatu Koskensilta, 17:50
Intro book on Set Theory., RoxPureblood, 15:06
2nd SIPTA School on Imprecise Probabilities, Enrique Miranda, 09:49
Conference with specialist on Russell (d. VERNANT) -last call, Colin . Schmidt, 05:03
i-C&P "Computers + Philosophy" int'l conference -LAST CALL (1000+150 wds.), Colin . Schmidt, 05:00
Re: God is way beyond logic and reasoning, William Elliot, 04:15

November 06, 2005

God is way beyond logic and reasoning, sam_icon, 23:27

November 05, 2005

Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 21:44
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 19:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 17:29
Re: Stone's Theorem, Herman Rubin, 16:53
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 14:55
Re: =, george, 14:51
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 14:34
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 14:32
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 13:39
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 13:02
Re: =, Owen, 10:25
Re: Zermelo-Fraenkel Theory Of Sets, Lee Rudolph, 06:19
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 03:54
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Keith Ramsay, 03:11
Re: Foundation and transitivity, WW, 01:52

November 04, 2005

Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, JEFFREY KETLAND, 23:53
Re: ring/field/algebra, george, 20:46
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Nam Nguyen, 20:33
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 17:02
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 16:30
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 14:35
Re: Stone's Theorem, Torkel Franzen, 13:55
Stone's Theorem, Colin, 13:37
Re: Poem on halting problem, Poldie, 09:27
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 09:23
Re: Venn Diagram of a Numerical Syllogism?, Poldie, 09:06
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 09:03
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 08:48
CSR-2006: Call For Papers, CSR-2006, 08:08
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 07:33
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 07:07

November 03, 2005

Re: proof is the inverse process of inference, zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx, 21:21
Re: =, george, 19:09
Re: =, george, 19:00
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 17:05
Re: proof is the inverse process of inference, |-|erc, 16:11
Re: =, H. Enderton, 14:52
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 14:52
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 14:03
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 12:04
Re: proof is the inverse process of inference, raydpratt, 09:52
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 08:55
Re: =, Owen, 08:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 08:26
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 07:56
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 07:54
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 07:36
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 07:26
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 07:07
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 06:31
Re: Question on upwards LST, Robert Low, 05:31
Re: Question on upwards LST, David C . Ullrich, 05:18
Re: Question on upwards LST, Robert Low, 05:13
proof is the inverse process of inference, |-|erc, 03:09
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 02:02
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:58
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 01:23
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 01:16
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 00:28
Re: nonstandard models of PA, Alex R, 00:10

November 02, 2005

Re: Question on upwards LST, Chris Menzel, 22:37
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 22:08
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 22:06
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 22:00
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 20:47
Re: OK, WHAT theory can't you prove? Name one that isn't G., b92057, 19:57
Re: OK, WHAT theory can't you prove? Name one that isn't G., b92057, 19:50
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 18:01
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 17:50
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 17:48
Re: Question on upwards LST, Robert Low, 17:37
Re: Foundation and transitivity, Jean-Pierre MERX, 17:35
Re: Question on upwards LST, poopdeville, 17:01
Re: =, george, 15:19
Re: =, Owen, 13:44
Re: =, H. Enderton, 13:20
Re: =, Owen, 12:23
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 08:58
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 08:22
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Stephen Harris, 08:10
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 07:58
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 07:22
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 07:00
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 06:54
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 06:52
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 06:40
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 06:21
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 06:10
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 06:03
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 05:32
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 05:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 05:30
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 05:27
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 05:22
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 05:15
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Aatu Koskensilta, 04:59
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 04:51
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 04:39
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 04:27
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 04:26
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 04:21
Re: God is a paradox., |-|erc, 03:53
Re: God is a paradox., Torkel Franzen, 02:48
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 02:14
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 02:13
Re: nonstandard models of PA, Aatu Koskensilta, 02:10
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:56
Re: nonstandard models of PA, William Elliot, 01:40
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:28
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:16
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 01:14
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 00:57
Re: Foundation and transitivity, Stephen J. Herschkorn, 00:15
Re: Foundation and transitivity, Stephen J. Herschkorn, 00:14
Re: God is a paradox., Rupert, 00:03

November 01, 2005

nonstandard models of PA, Bill Taylor, 23:47
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 22:50
Re: Foundation and transitivity, Rupert, 22:32
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 21:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 21:08
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 21:04
Re: God is a paradox., Nick, 19:43
Re: =, H. Enderton, 18:33
Re: nonstandard models of PA, H. Enderton, 18:29
Re: God is a paradox., Starbles, 18:07
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 17:35
Foundation and transitivity, Jean-Pierre MERX, 16:07
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 15:13
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 14:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 14:15
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 14:01
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 09:43
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 09:14
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 09:07
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 08:33
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 07:40
Re: nonstandard models of PA, William Elliot, 07:15
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 06:03
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 02:33
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 02:28
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 02:06
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 02:05
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 02:04
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:53
Re: God is a paradox., |-|erc, 01:42
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 01:40
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 01:36
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 01:31
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, abo, 01:09
Re: God is a paradox., Torkel Franzen, 01:02
Venn Diagram of a Numerical Syllogism?, raydpratt, 00:25
Re: God is a paradox., Starbles, 00:14
nonstandard models of PA, Bill Taylor, 00:14

October 31, 2005

Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Daryl McCullough, 23:10
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 22:13
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Torkel Franzen, 22:00
Re: God is a paradox., Torkel Franzen, 21:56
God is a paradox., Starbles, 21:27
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 21:04
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, george, 20:48
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 20:45
Re: Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 20:09
[FAQ, 99/07/28] Mathematical logic on the web, Boris 'pi' Piwinger, 20:03
Penrose's reply to Chalmers, Rupert, 17:32