Activity for xamidi
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #290765 |
@#36356 Technical remarks do not miss the point but are required to substantiate any philosophical view on a formal topic. In this case, I used technical arguments to show that certain philosophical standpoints are either (a) a mere lack of understanding in the subject, or (b) an intended mystificati... (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Comment | Post #290765 |
@#36356 My comments were neither philosophical, nor do they have anything to do with physics. Not sure where you see a connection to the multiverse theory. Logical systems, just like [formal systems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_system) in general, are not per se related to physical objects. (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Comment | Post #290765 |
My point is that it is merely a matter of definition what we put in a set theory, so there cannot a "single true one", but there are infinitely many variations, each based on preference.
But it also becomes messy when we need an infinite amount of axioms, since a proof can never be infinite, so it... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Comment | Post #290765 |
As we know since [Gödel's incompleteness theorems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems), there can never be a "One True Set Theory", since such a system could not be both complete and consistent. So whenever there is an independent statement, we can decide whether we ... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #290943 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291262 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291262 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291262 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291262 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291262 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Defining Bayes’s theorem from scratch in ZFC All of this has already been dealt with on Metamath, see mpeuni/bayesth or asrt/bayesth. At first, they had to decide on concrete formulations of ZFC axioms, which must be stated in a formal language. All referenced axioms (including definitions of, for example, the class of probability measures a... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #290943 |
Suggested edit: (more) |
helpful | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291261 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291261 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291261 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What is the significance of the K-axiom in modal logic S5? Axioms exist to define proof systems, i.e. syntactical ways to derive theorems — in contrast to semantics, which concerns meaning. This is accomplished by combining axioms with (meta-logical) rules of inference in so-called proofs. > The middle implication arrow is meta-logical, isn’t it? No, i... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Comment | Post #278382 |
This wouldn't be useless if this site was properly SEOed. I tried finding a Q&A site with "proof theory" in it. (After all, I did not find Codidact through search engines, but incidentally, also when searching internally, there are now only two results for `"proof theory"`. This thread, and the other... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291259 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How can we grow this community? You really need to step up your SEO game. I'd like to elaborate this from my own perspective, after how I just found this forum. Even though @ajekb78 essentially already made the same point, but it oddly gained no recognition. Up until an hour ago, I had no idea this site even existed. For a fe... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |