Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
More To Be Understood By You

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on November 8, 2001 22:10:00 UTC


I'm having to revert to set theory because it is perhaps the most basic theory we have of mathematical reduction (specifically ZF set theory). So far set theory has been rather successful in translating all of mathematics into the language of ZF set theory (category theory is making some challenges however). If you are referring to any attempt to translate mathematics into first-order logic then set theory is the creature you are talking about. So, I'm just gonna cut to the chase with you and start framing these responses in this environment.

>>>If ANYTHING exists, then you can use logic by assigning 1 to existence of this object and 0 to lack of existence. That is how math originate, and that is why it is accurate in predicting behaviour of existing objects.>But it (math) is even accurate in description of NON-EXISTING objects - just keep symbol 0 for non-existing objects.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins