Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v8p1sl$9eoo$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Moebius <invalid@example.invalid> Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.math Subject: Re: Replacement of Cardinality Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:12:21 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 15 Message-ID: <v8p1sl$9eoo$1@dont-email.me> References: <hsRF8g6ZiIZRPFaWbZaL2jR1IiU@jntp> <6b837540-3d9a-4b8e-9a70-88d52e81a1a4@att.net> <xQQT0K_Q_k2FbMcCUXF8j3CEg84@jntp> <9822f5da-d61e-44ba-9d70-2850da971b42@att.net> <p36L63dXamDAkHDhkZhDKqx-h-o@jntp> <d8bbe664-a601-4590-9a7f-d5312b4dae54@att.net> <F6pqEi9Vg1YMcYTcIPQNs6NU_vI@jntp> <4f606ef2-ef6c-487b-b959-d109e374929f@att.net> <vpb42BOZYYy79eBYzCXpUbsjGQc@jntp> <f5086d19-ab91-429a-9dfe-2325e56c97a4@att.net> <6WIT-GYNvuMQ6ADdNvBdVKBkQ1c@jntp> <14c93f38-c155-44fe-a6ba-d0f143b374cc@att.net> Reply-To: invalid@example.invalid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 01:12:21 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="781e31630972fbca343b535050bc8635"; logging-data="310040"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/OWoxz/tWLiQg9aqlZZr5H" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:U0UnzQQBSfZbw8So9PB95MXWEyY= Content-Language: de-DE In-Reply-To: <14c93f38-c155-44fe-a6ba-d0f143b374cc@att.net> Bytes: 2102 Am 04.08.2024 um 22:16 schrieb Jim Burns: > On 8/4/2024 2:13 PM, WM wrote: >> When all x are involved, >> the universal quantifier is usually not written. > When a universal quantifier is not written, > it is implicit, and > it can only stand implicitly outside the formula. Right. Still there's a distinct problem with "implicit quantification" IN THIS CASE. (Hence WM's "argument" is nonsense anyway.) Here we need "∀x > 0". Clearly an "implicit quantifier" does not know that he's restricted to "x > 0".