sci.logic (date)
October 31, 2006
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Jesse F. Hughes, 15:10
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 14:59
- Gödel's modal proof that there is something, Dunk, 14:16
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, MoeBlee, 12:43
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 12:26
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 12:24
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 10:45
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Jesse F. Hughes, 10:23
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 09:53
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 09:41
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Nam Nguyen, 09:30
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 09:21
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 09:14
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 09:11
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 09:02
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 08:59
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 08:57
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 08:42
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, glennlieding, 08:37
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Roberto Vescarelli, 08:33
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 08:16
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 08:01
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 07:44
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 07:24
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 06:57
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, Rupert, 02:19
- Re: The L3 Revolution, galathaea, 01:40
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, galathaea, 00:45
October 30, 2006
- The L3 Revolution, William Elliot, 23:44
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 20:48
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Peter_Smith, 19:36
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Peter_Smith, 19:04
- Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument, george, 18:30
- Re: Need help constructing ADD function from PA, george, 18:19
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, Rupert, 17:33
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, Dave L. Renfro, 16:11
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 16:11
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 15:59
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, george, 15:52
- Re: The L3 Revolution, galathaea, 15:44
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Roberto Vescarelli, 15:26
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 14:22
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, MoeBlee, 14:03
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, MoeBlee, 13:51
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Paul Holbach, 13:04
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 10:16
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, Eckard Blumschein, 08:07
- Re: BEING AND EXISTENCE, Owen, 07:22
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 04:44
- Re: Petersen's magical argument, R. Srinivasan, 04:43
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, R. Srinivasan, 03:08
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 02:46
- Longest Day of the Year, William Elliot, 02:29
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, Rupert, 00:23
October 29, 2006
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Aatu Koskensilta, 21:24
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 17:27
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 15:28
- BEING AND EXISTENCE, Roberto Vescarelli, 11:21
- Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument, george, 10:12
- Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>, Art Deco, 10:00
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 08:08
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 07:59
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 07:50
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, lugita15, 06:07
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Peter_Smith, 05:31
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 03:51
- Re: SCIENCE IS DYING ONLY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM?, Brad Guth, 01:02
- Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>, Brad Guth, 00:53
- Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>, Brad Guth, 00:39
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, Charlie-Boo, 00:16
October 28, 2006
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, galathaea, 22:04
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 20:57
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 20:02
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 15:14
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 14:42
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 14:29
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 14:24
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 14:22
- Re: Petersen's magical argument, LauLuna, 14:21
- Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument, george, 14:18
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, Charlie-Boo, 13:55
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 13:39
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 12:56
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 12:38
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 12:05
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 05:40
October 27, 2006
- Re: The L3 Revolution, William Elliot, 22:45
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 21:25
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 20:09
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 17:54
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 17:42
- Re: History of the deduction theorem, Frederick Williams, 17:23
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 17:16
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 16:52
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Jan Burse, 16:46
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 16:33
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 16:11
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 15:36
- Re: On Ultrafinitism, MoeBlee, 15:28
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 15:24
- History of the deduction theorem, andreas . stokke, 14:50
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 14:16
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 14:04
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 13:49
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 12:51
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Alan Smaill, 11:31
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 10:12
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 10:10
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Aatu Koskensilta, 10:01
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Aatu Koskensilta, 09:38
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 09:32
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Aatu Koskensilta, 08:33
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Aatu Koskensilta, 08:30
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 07:50
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, lugita15, 06:31
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, lugita15, 06:29
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 06:12
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 03:54
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 03:15
- Re: Equivalence, Aatu Koskensilta, 02:42
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 02:31
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 02:28
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 02:13
- On Ultrafinitism, Bill Taylor, 00:37
October 26, 2006
- Re: Proof of finite axiomatizability, Aatu Koskensilta, 23:20
- Re: Proof of finite axiomatizability, William Elliot, 22:59
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Aatu Koskensilta, 21:58
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, lugita15, 21:43
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Aatu Koskensilta, 20:33
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 20:18
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 20:06
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Aatu Koskensilta, 19:53
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 19:13
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Aatu Koskensilta, 18:58
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Aatu Koskensilta, 18:49
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 18:46
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 18:45
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx, 18:44
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Rupert, 18:24
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Aatu Koskensilta, 18:07
- Re: Strange Borel quote, Herman Jurjus, 17:53
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 17:46
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, lugita15, 17:08
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 12:54
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Frederick Williams, 10:44
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Frederick Williams, 10:41
- Re: Proof of finite axiomatizability, Atreides, 10:35
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, aatu . koskensilta, 08:57
- Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations, Rupert, 07:41
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 07:30
- Re: Proof of finite axiomatizability, David C . Ullrich, 05:33
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 02:34
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., The Ghost In The Machine, 02:25
- Re: Proof of finite axiomatizability, William Elliot, 01:50
- Proof of finite axiomatizability, Atreides, 00:10
October 25, 2006
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 20:51
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 18:19
- Question about Quine's New Foundations, lugita15, 17:03
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 15:35
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 14:58
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 12:10
- Re: The L3 Revolution, Frederick Williams, 10:40
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 06:17
- Re: Applying logic to how search engine work., David C . Ullrich, 05:27
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 04:47
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 04:00
- A Simple Example on Model Theory and Descriptive Set Theory, Payam Razavi, 01:57
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 00:25
October 24, 2006
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 23:58
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, george, 23:49
- Re: The L3 Revolution, William Elliot, 22:59
- The L3 Revolution, Confutus, 21:57
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 21:41
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 18:36
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 18:29
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 18:24
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Alan Smaill, 16:51
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 16:31
- Re: Strange Borel quote, abo, 15:57
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, fully functional, Confutus, 15:25
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 13:51
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 13:03
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 12:49
- Applying logic to how search engine work., neo, 12:41
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 12:32
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., R. Srinivasan, 12:23
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Frederick Williams, 10:44
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Frederick Williams, 10:40
- Re: Silly Question, UC, 09:59
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 04:33
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, LauLuna, 04:18
- Re: The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., Stephen Harris, 03:18
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, fully functional, herbzet, 02:49
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 02:24
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, Stephen Harris, 00:54
October 23, 2006
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 23:04
- The Modified Halting Problem, Take ??? ., The Ghost In The Machine, 21:09
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 20:47
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, george, 20:39
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 15:10
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, LauLuna, 13:38
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, R. Srinivasan, 12:04
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, Peter Olcott, 11:00
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Alan Smaill, 10:55
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Peter Olcott, 10:43
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, abo, 10:31
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, R. Srinivasan, 10:30
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 10:30
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 09:44
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 09:36
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, Peter Olcott, 09:03
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 09:01
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Herman Jurjus, 08:59
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, R. Srinivasan, 08:43
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, R. Srinivasan, 08:31
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., aatu . koskensilta, 06:50
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, aatu . koskensilta, 06:46
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 06:16
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 05:51
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Tron, 05:27
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, R. Srinivasan, 04:48
- Re: Wittgenstein's Fuzzy Family, Wanker, 04:04
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, R. Srinivasan, 03:02
- :: cyclic negations ::, galathaea, 01:51
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, abo, 01:11
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, Nam Nguyen, 00:39
October 22, 2006
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., schoenfeld . one, 21:00
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., schoenfeld . one, 20:53
- Re: Equivalence, herbzet, 19:31
- Exit Plato's Cave - for real, instructions given, Douglas Eagleson, 19:05
- Re: Petersen's magical argument, R. Srinivasan, 16:51
- Re: Petersen's magical argument, R. Srinivasan, 14:45
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Peter Olcott, 14:34
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 14:07
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 14:04
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 14:02
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, Peter Olcott, 13:46
- Re: Where's the logic in Earth having that moon ???, Brad Guth, 13:33
- Re: Is the Halting Problem merely an ill-formed question?, george, 13:30
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 13:27
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, Jack Campin - bogus address, 13:27
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Peter Olcott, 13:18
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, LauLuna, 12:45
- Re: Petersen's magical argument, abo, 12:43
- Re: A implies I, Owen, 12:41
- Petersen's magical argument, LauLuna, 12:12
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, abo, 11:13
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Dave Seaman, 09:27
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 09:24
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., OwlHoot, 09:11
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, R. Srinivasan, 05:48
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Nam Nguyen, 03:42
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Wolfgang Rave, 03:39
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Proginoskes, 02:52
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Proginoskes, 02:48
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 02:03
- Re: Halting Problem for Humans, abo, 01:54
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Keith Ramsay, 01:35
October 21, 2006
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, fully functional, William Elliot, 23:15
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., William Elliot, 23:05
- Re: Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, lugita15, 20:27
- Axiomatization of Ordinal Arithmetic, lugita15, 20:24
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., Randy Poe, 18:07
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 17:55
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 16:59
- Logic of uncertainty, fully functional, Confutus, 16:50
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 16:30
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., drmwecker, 15:45
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 14:24
- Halting Problem for Humans, Daryl McCullough, 14:22
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 13:21
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., William Hughes, 12:50
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, george, 12:29
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., schoenfeld . one, 12:21
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), George Dance, 12:19
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., george, 11:50
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., schoenfeld . one, 10:10
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., David C . Ullrich, 10:00
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, Peter Olcott, 09:46
- Re: Posts that should never be responded to ..., William Hughes, 09:32
- Posts that should never be responded to ..., Peter Webb, 09:26
- Re: Is Einstein's E=mc2, CONCEPTUALLY applicable for energy emitted Chemical Reactions., Peter Webb, 09:24
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., William Elliot, 04:29
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, R. Srinivasan, 03:31
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 02:23
- A kind of fun question., Nam Nguyen, 02:01
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, modal logic, Confutus, 01:53
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Aatu Koskensilta, 01:36
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, Aatu Koskensilta, 01:25
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, george, 01:21
October 20, 2006
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 23:53
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 23:15
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 22:50
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 22:49
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 22:49
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 22:48
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 22:48
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., William Elliot, 22:15
- Re: Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Frederick Williams, 22:00
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 22:00
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, george, 19:25
- Re: A implies I, Owen, 18:55
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Jan Burse, 18:45
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 18:09
- Re: A implies I, Owen, 17:59
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), George Dance, 17:52
- Re: A implies I, Owen, 17:47
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Alan Smaill, 17:47
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), George Dance, 17:39
- Re: Proofs to programs, Alan Smaill, 17:36
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Alan Smaill, 17:20
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, george, 16:04
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 15:57
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 15:42
- Re: Wittgenstein's Fuzzy Family, Immortalist, 12:27
- Logic of uncertainty, early explorations., Confutus, 12:20
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, LauLuna, 11:35
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Jack Campin - bogus address, 09:59
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Alan Smaill, 09:35
- Where's the logic in Earth having that moon ???, Brad Guth, 09:22
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 09:13
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 09:04
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 09:00
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 08:29
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Alan Smaill, 07:50
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Herman Jurjus, 05:43
- Re: What is the difference?, Aatu Koskensilta, 05:41
- Re: What is the difference?, Peter_Smith, 03:11
October 19, 2006
- What is the difference?, bluelabel, 22:40
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 22:14
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 20:41
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 19:50
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 19:40
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 18:50
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Peter Niessen, 18:42
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 17:57
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 15:19
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 15:13
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 10:55
- Re: Silly Question, Frederick Williams, 10:46
- Re: Strange Borel quote, Herman Jurjus, 10:44
- Re: Non-arbitrary mathematics, Frederick Williams, 10:30
- Non-arbitrary mathematics, Eckard Blumschein, 09:32
- Re: New sub intuitionistic logic ? not sub minimal, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 08:11
- Re: Strange Borel quote, Proginoskes, 01:07
October 18, 2006
- Re: Strange Borel quote, galathaea, 17:55
- Re: Strange Borel quote, abo, 17:34
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 17:26
- Re: Silly Question, Mark Wallace, 16:59
- Re: Strange Borel quote, abo, 15:52
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, abo, 15:42
- Re: A implies I, Chris Menzel, 15:20
- Re: Need help constructing an add function from PA, george, 14:51
- Re: A implies I, William of Ockham, 14:23
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 14:21
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, MoeBlee, 13:04
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, george, 12:41
- Re: A implies I, Yuri, 11:19
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Frederick Williams, 10:47
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 09:59
- Re: New sub minimal or sub intuitionistic logic ? intference rules, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 09:21
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Daryl McCullough, 08:52
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, Peter Olcott, 07:59
- Re: A implies I, Chris Menzel, 07:53
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 06:52
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, Peter_Smith, 04:33
- hi, mysun_1, 01:13
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Nam Nguyen, 01:00
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 00:00
October 17, 2006
- Re: how to define Thm in PRA, george, 23:57
- Re: A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem, george, 23:51
- Re: Are Heytings axioms for intuitionistic logic sufficient?, Keith Ramsay, 23:30
- Re: Silly Question, Odysseus, 21:29
- Re: A implies I, Chris Menzel, 21:22
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 20:03
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 19:45
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 19:40
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 19:33
- Re: A implies I, George Dance, 19:26
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Daniel T., 19:24
- Re: A implies I, Chris Menzel, 19:12
- Re: Strange Borel quote, galathaea, 17:07
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 16:52
- Re: A implies I, William of Ockham, 16:42
- Re: A implies I, William of Ockham, 16:37
- Re: Strange Borel quote, Dave L. Renfro, 15:47
- Strange Borel quote, Herman Jurjus, 15:14
- Re: A implies I, Chris Menzel, 13:45
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Daniel T., 13:34
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 13:20
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 13:17
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 12:47
- Re: A implies I, Arturo Magidin, 12:46
- Re: A implies I, William of Ockham, 12:31
- Re: Silly Question, Prisoner at War, 12:08
- Re: Silly Question, Prisoner at War, 12:06
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 12:01
- Re: Silly Question, Spehro Pefhany, 11:58
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 11:58
- Re: Silly Question, Arturo Magidin, 11:07
- Silly Question, Prisoner at War, 10:54
October 14, 2006
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, gibbs, 23:31
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 19:34
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 19:26
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Daniel T., 18:14
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, gibbs, 16:00
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Daniel T., 15:48
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Russ Rose, 11:45
- Re: Beliefs; Necessary But Not Sufficient For Truth?, Paul Holbach, 10:06
- Re: Rules of divisibility for a counting number N, me13013, 09:36
October 08, 2006
- Re: Question about second-order logic, abo, 11:04
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 09:06
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 08:47
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 08:38
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 08:23
- Re: Is Einstein’s E=mc2, CONCEPTUALLY applicable for energy emitted Chemical Reactions., physicsajay, 08:07
- Re: Question about second-order logic, LauLuna, 07:59
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, Stephen Harris, 06:12
- Re: Trademark expressions in symbolic logic, William Elliot, 03:23
- Re: Trademark expressions in symbolic logic, William Elliot, 03:22
- Re: 2nd-Order Predicate: mammal ?, Karmata, 02:45
- Re: Help with models, Nam Nguyen, 02:11
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Chris Menzel, 01:33
October 07, 2006
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Rupert, 23:18
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, galathaea, 22:57
- Re: Question about second-order logic, lugita15, 22:04
- 2nd-Order Predicate: mammal ?, Karmata, 21:58
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Karmata, 21:08
- Re: Trademark expressions in symbolic logic, Chris Menzel, 21:07
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, mikegordge, 20:54
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Karmata, 20:41
- Trademark expressions in symbolic logic, michel . cotourier, 20:34
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, george, 20:12
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, Stephen Harris, 19:10
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, Stephen Harris, 18:58
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, mikegordge, 17:50
- Re: Craig's theorem, Glaukon, 17:29
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Chris Menzel, 17:23
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, Stephen Harris, 17:23
- Re: Modal Logic, Chris Menzel, 17:09
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, Confutus, 16:41
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, Charlie-Boo, 16:25
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, Stephen Harris, 14:29
- Re: Question about second-order logic, lugita15, 11:18
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Paul Holbach, 11:00
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Paul Holbach, 10:34
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Paul Holbach, 10:30
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Paul Holbach, 10:11
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Paul Holbach, 09:09
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Paul Holbach, 08:59
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 08:21
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 07:15
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, mikegordge, 03:05
- Re: "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, galathaea, 02:30
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Ross A. Finlayson, 02:11
- Re: :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, mikegordge, 02:10
- :: quantum incoherence and the logical structure of science (re: mike gordge and obscene videos) ::, galathaea, 01:58
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Karmata, 00:08
October 06, 2006
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Karmata, 22:43
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, herbzet, 21:53
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, george, 21:00
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, george, 20:53
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Rupert, 20:11
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, lugita15, 20:04
- "is a" & "has a" relations re: 2nd-Order Logic, Karmata, 19:12
- Re: Craig's theorem, Peter_Smith, 19:08
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 18:22
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Karmata, 18:22
- Re: Craig's theorem, Glaukon, 17:55
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Karmata, 17:38
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 16:29
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 16:15
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 16:00
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 15:42
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 14:45
- Re: Craig's theorem, T.B., 14:25
- Craig's theorem, Glaukon, 13:57
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 12:45
- Re: Help with models, MoeBlee, 12:35
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, Confutus, 12:34
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 11:49
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 11:43
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Paul Holbach, 09:18
- Re: Modal Logic, Owen, 07:24
- Re: Help with models, bluelabel, 06:33
- Re: 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Peter_Smith, 02:16
October 05, 2006
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, herbzet, 23:44
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, herbzet, 23:33
- Is Einstein’s E=mc2, CONCEPTUALLY applicable for energy emitted Chemical Reactions., physicsajay, 23:16
- 2nd-Order Predication over 1st-Order Objects, Karmata, 22:19
- Re: Thankyou and goodbye., george, 20:46
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 20:01
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 18:48
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, Alan Smaill, 18:16
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, Rupert, 18:02
- Re: Modal Logic, Jan Burse, 17:16
- Re: Help with models, Barb Knox, 17:03
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 16:54
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 16:42
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), George Dance, 16:03
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 16:01
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), George Dance, 15:51
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 15:06
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 15:06
- Help with models, bluelabel, 14:57
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 14:45
- Re: Modal Logic, Dmitry Sustretov <dmitry.sustretov@xxxxxxxxx>, 14:41
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 14:40
- Re: Modal Logic, Jan Burse, 13:02
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Morgan, 12:56
- Re: A Questionable Foundation, MoeBlee, 12:36
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 12:31
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, aatu . koskensilta, 11:57
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, Ross A. Finlayson, 11:31
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, aatu . koskensilta, 11:29
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, aatu . koskensilta, 11:15
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, aatu . koskensilta, 11:08
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, aatu . koskensilta, 10:59
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 10:50
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 10:43
- Re: A Questionable Foundation, Han de Bruijn, 09:37
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 08:07
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 07:42
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 07:08
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 06:47
- Re: Question about second-order logic, lugita15, 06:28
- Re: Question about second-order logic, Rupert, 04:50
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, Rupert, 03:21
October 04, 2006
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 23:35
- Re: how to prove ~ ( P & Q) => ~P v ~Q, Frederick Williams, 21:59
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 21:56
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 21:55
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 21:53
- Re: Modal Logic, Frederick Williams, 21:48
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 21:14
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 20:56
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 20:46
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 20:41
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Jack Campin - bogus address, 20:19
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 19:55
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, Confutus, 19:33
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Stephen Harris, 19:24
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, mordov, 18:37
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 18:26
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, Confutus, 18:08
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 17:09
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, Confutus, 16:51
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 16:30
- Re: Computability and logic, george, 16:25
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 16:08
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 16:07
- Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, lugita15, 16:01
- Re: Computability and logic, george, 14:55
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 14:23
- Re: Question about second-order logic, yumingfeng25928@xxxxxxxxx, 14:07
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, mordov, 13:46
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 12:49
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, Jan Burse, 12:08
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 12:05
- Re: Modal Logic, Jan Burse, 12:04
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 11:47
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 10:19
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Alan Smaill, 09:07
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 08:29
- Re: Thankyou and goodbye., David C . Ullrich, 07:58
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, David C . Ullrich, 07:50
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 07:28
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 07:09
- Explicit choice functions on subsets of R, Peter Webb, 01:12
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Steven Zenith, 01:05
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 01:00
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 00:53
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 00:25
October 03, 2006
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, Confutus, 23:58
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 23:56
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, JEFFREY KETLAND, 23:45
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, MoeBlee, 23:42
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 23:37
- Re: Modus Ponens and Trivial Truth, Confutus, 23:33
- Re: Modal Logic, Confutus, 22:12
- Re: Sheer lies, cheating by Dr Alexander Inpain , who introduced as Scientist and Administrator at CERN ( European Organization for Nuclear Research ) in various post . But it proved all fraud. He was disusing about my work Einstein Sep 1905 paper and my book, physicsajay, 21:48
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 21:45
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Bill Hale, 20:48
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Charlie-Boo, 20:43
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 18:48
- Thankyou and goodbye., John Jones, 18:09
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 18:00
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 17:42
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 17:36
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, MoeBlee, 17:07
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, MoeBlee, 17:02
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 16:54
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, MoeBlee, 16:48
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 16:43
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 16:09
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, MoeBlee, 16:06
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 15:47
- Re: Turing vs. Godel (Newbie Question), Alan Smaill, 15:36
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 15:31
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 15:11
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 14:59
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 14:47
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Bill Hale, 14:47
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 14:19
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 14:14
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 13:57
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 13:25
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 13:01
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Dirk Van de moortel, 12:42
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, hale, 12:28
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 12:03
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 11:36
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 10:39
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Philo D, 10:32
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), LauLuna, 10:30
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 10:08
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 10:04
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 10:02
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Peter_Smith, 09:51
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Patricia Shanahan, 09:46
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 09:23
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 09:20
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, abo, 08:46
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 08:21
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, David C . Ullrich, 08:01
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, David C . Ullrich, 08:01
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, David C . Ullrich, 07:57
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 07:18
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, abo, 07:18
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Alan Smaill, 06:59
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 05:31
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 05:11
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 04:28
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 04:19
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Peter_Smith, 03:42
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 03:23
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 02:12
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, abo, 02:04
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Nam Nguyen, 02:01
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), abo, 01:42
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, abo, 01:34
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Peter Webb, 00:02
October 02, 2006
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 22:04
- Re: Introduction to Tarski's works, Stephen Harris, 21:42
- Question about second-order logic, lugita15, 21:38
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Aatu Koskensilta, 21:00
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 20:42
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 20:39
- Re: Program Synthesis and formallization?, Charlie-Boo, 20:14
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), khodaeifar@xxxxxxxxx, 18:59
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Peter_Smith, 18:56
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Peter_Smith, 18:50
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Aatu Koskensilta, 18:44
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), khodaeifar@xxxxxxxxx, 18:41
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), khodaeifar@xxxxxxxxx, 18:39
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), khodaeifar@xxxxxxxxx, 18:37
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 18:32
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Stephen Harris, 18:09
- Re: Computability and logic, MoeBlee, 18:02
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Dirk Van de moortel, 17:49
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Aatu Koskensilta, 17:47
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 17:36
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Aatu Koskensilta, 17:34
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Peter_Smith, 17:34
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 17:29
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Khodaeifar, 17:20
- Re: recursively axiomatizable, Peter_Smith, 17:18
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Khodaeifar, 17:08
- Re: Zen and...Math??, NYC XYZ, 16:17
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), joes, 16:17
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Dirk Van de moortel, 16:06
- Re: Self-Refrential, Dirk Van de moortel, 16:05
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), Dirk Van de moortel, 16:05
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Tim Peters, 16:02
- Re: Self-Refrential (2), abo, 16:01
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Aatu Koskensilta, 15:38
- Self-Refrential (2), Khodaeifar, 15:25
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 15:24
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 15:15
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 14:55
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Aatu Koskensilta, 14:54
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 14:52
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Aatu Koskensilta, 14:49
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 14:43
- recursively axiomatizable, bluelabel, 14:39
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, george, 14:33
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 14:09
- Re: Zen and...Math??, wit, 13:58
- Program Synthesis and formallization?, Mitch, 13:53
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 13:49
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 13:42
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 13:00
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Alan Smaill, 12:51
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 12:42
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 12:41
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 12:39
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Alan Smaill, 12:38
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 12:34
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 12:30
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 12:20
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 12:11
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 12:07
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Chris Menzel, 11:59
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Arturo Magidin, 11:47
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Arturo Magidin, 11:33
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 11:23
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Bhupinder Singh Anand, 11:21
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 11:21
- Re: Self-Refrential, Lee Rudolph, 10:58
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Aatu Koskensilta, 10:08
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Aatu Koskensilta, 10:03
- Re: Self-Refrential, Peter_Smith, 10:00
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 09:56
- Re: Self-Refrential, Aatu Koskensilta, 09:55
- Self-Refrential, Khodaeifar, 09:35
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 09:07
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 08:54
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 08:47
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Arturo Magidin, 08:41
- Re: how to prove ~ ( P & Q) => ~P v ~Q, Jack Campin - bogus address, 08:30
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 08:30
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 08:22
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 08:11
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Charlie-Boo, 07:33
- Re: how to prove ~ ( P & Q) => ~P v ~Q, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 07:07
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Daryl McCullough, 07:07
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 07:03
- Re: [FAQ, 99/07/28] Mathematical logic on the web, translogi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 07:00
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, David C . Ullrich, 06:33
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 05:41
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 05:28
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 05:12
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 03:47
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Bhupinder Singh Anand, 03:40
- Re: Introduction to Tarski's works, Peter_Smith, 03:39
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 03:14
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 03:09
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 02:42
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 02:24
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 02:19
- Re: Introduction to Tarski's works, wit, 02:16
- Introduction to Tarski's works, mctodd333, 01:54
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Bhupinder Singh Anand, 01:47
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 01:23
October 01, 2006
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Peter Webb, 23:45
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 23:11
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 22:48
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 22:23
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 21:34
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 21:23
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Charlie-Boo, 20:59
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Charlie-Boo, 20:44
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 19:28
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 19:00
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 18:24
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 18:18
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, MoeBlee, 18:16
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Chris Menzel, 17:53
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Tim Peters, 17:31
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 17:21
- Re: Sudoku Creator and Step by Step Solver, Jan Burse, 17:10
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Stephen Harris, 16:57
- Re: Modus Ponens Is Unprovable?, George Dance, 16:30
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 16:23
- Re: Sudoku Creator and Step by Step Solver, Peter_Smith, 15:49
- Re: Sudoku Creator and Step by Step Solver, George Dance, 15:41
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Chris Menzel, 14:58
- Re: Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Arturo Magidin, 14:57
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 13:33
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 13:15
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 12:28
- Re: Computability and logic, Tom, 12:27
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, R. Srinivasan, 11:59
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 11:42
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 11:24
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 11:09
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 10:58
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 10:07
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 09:41
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 09:27
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 09:26
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 09:19
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 09:17
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 09:12
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 09:09
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 09:00
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 08:57
- Arturo and Tim Peters" - Zorn's Lemma, Peter Webb, 08:55
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 08:46
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Peter_Smith, 08:40
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 08:37
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 08:14
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 07:56
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 06:44
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, R. Srinivasan, 06:27
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 06:00
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 05:57
- ., John Jones, 05:42
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 05:07
- Re: Goldbach Conjecture & the Foundation of First Order Logic., Alexandre BELDI, 04:59
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 04:37
- Re: Why Has None of Computer Science been Formalized?, Steven Zenith, 04:24
- Re: A New Resolution to Impredicativity, Keith Ramsay, 03:51
- Re: Question about first-order arithmetic, Peter_Smith, 03:32
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 02:17
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 02:09
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Bhupinder Singh Anand, 00:39
September 30, 2006
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Jack Campin - bogus address, 20:19
- Question about first-order arithmetic, lugita15, 20:16
- [FAQ, 99/07/28] Mathematical logic on the web, Boris 'pi' Piwinger, 20:03
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 20:02
- Re: how to prove ~ ( P & Q) => ~P v ~Q, Peter_Smith, 20:00
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Daryl McCullough, 19:49
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, Peter_Smith, 19:48
- Re: how to prove ~ ( P & Q) => ~P v ~Q, William Elliot, 19:26
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 19:14
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 19:07
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 19:02
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 18:31
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, John Jones, 18:01
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Charlie-Boo, 17:52
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 17:48
- Re: Foundations of Mathematics, Stephen Harris, 17:25
- Re: My investigations into Godels Incompleteness Theorem, John Jones, 16:27
Privacy Policy