HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wjcastre@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (W.Jose Castrellon G.)
Subject: Re: Proof Theory reference needed
Organization: The Ohio State University,Math.Dept.(studnt)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 04:50:42 GMT

In article <1k5n2rEINNruv@uni-erlangen.de> 
jnjohann@immd1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Jan Johannsen) writes:

>
>The following seems to be a folklore result in Proof Theory:
>
>Let PA be (first-order) Peano Arithmetic, and let G be the set of all
>Pi_1-sentences  true in the standard model N. 
>Then PA and PA + G have the same set of provably recursive functions.
>
>Could someone please give me a hint where to find a proof of this
>fact ?
>
>Thanks    Jan
>

You might want to try the book by Joram Hirschfeld and William Wheeler
on theory of models and arithmetic in the Springer series; even if the proof
is not there, chances are you'll find the section on aritmetic is quite 
interesting; the whole book contains many applications. [both were students 
under Abraham Robinson...].
Also, it might be in the De Millo & Lipton paper, where they prove the  
independence of the P<NP conjecture from certain axiomatic systems.
Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.math
From: wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor)
Subject: Self-reference.
Organization: Department of Mathematics, University of Canterbury
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:11:21 GMT

There is quite an amusing article on self-reference in the latest 
Math Intelligencer, (Vol 14, #4, 1992).  It is a paper by Dosen entitled
"One more reference on self-reference", which very appropriately has only one
paper mentioned in the references: itself !!

There was one passage that caught my eye, and it may ring loud bells with others
as well:

 If a typical working mathematician shows an interest in this phenomenon, it is
 more on the recreational side, in a Gardner mood.
 .....one can hardly expect to learn much. One just gets the thrill of 
 something amusing, but also whimsical, confused, and a little bit unnerving -
 intriguing but not worth pursuing seriously - something basically hollow.
 One abandons such papers without enlightenment, without any sense of achievement.

How very true !

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Bill Taylor              wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Kleeneness is next to Godelness.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.logic,comp.lang.prolog,sci.math
From: iam@CS.Stanford.EDU (Ian A. Mason)
Subject: Re: Definitive temporal logic source
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:05:25 GMT

there is also another book in the csli series that is relevant,
namely goldblatt's (second edition of) logics of time and computation.
Xref: sparky sci.logic:2637 comp.lang.prolog:2450 sci.math:18750
From: gavan@elc.mth.uct.ac.za (Gavan Tredoux)
Newsgroups: sci.logic,comp.lang.prolog,sci.math
Subject: Re: Definitive temporal logic source
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:38:42 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes) writes:
: In article <1993Jan23.114811.28054@city.cs> mb108@cs.city.ac.uk (omo ADELAKUN T K) writes:
: >Can anyone point me to a very good text on temporal logic? In the same
: >vein, does anyone know of a temporal logic interpreter (something along
: >the lines of Prolog or extensions thereto)?
: >
: >Thanx for any responses - which I'd prefer to come to me direct so I can 
: >post a summary.
: >
: >Toyin.
: 
: I won't commit myself on "very good", but the book I have on temporal
: and other modal logics is "A Manual of Intensional Logic" (I can't
: recall the author) from the Center for the Study of Language and
: Information at Stanford. 

N. Rescher and ? Urquhart, Temporal Logic, 1977 Just look for
Rescher in your lib catalogue.

F. Kr\"oger, Temporal Logic of Programs, Springer, 1988

R. Goldblatt, Logics of Time and Computation, CLSI, 1987

There is a programming language that is to temporal logic
what prolog is to first order logic. Try anon ftp to
m1.cs.man.ac.uk and have a look in pub/TRS.

Gavan Tredoux
UCT
Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.math
From: torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen)
Subject: Re: Self-reference.
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
	<1993Jan28.142508.15763@guinness.idbsu.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:50:05 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.142508.15763@guinness.idbsu.edu> holmes@opal.idbsu.edu 
(Randall Holmes) writes:

   >Simple?!?

  Actually I canceled my article after looking at the article Bill quoted. 
My grumbling was misplaced, since that quote was just another self-reference!
The author was well aware of the mathematical uses of self-reference (in
the diagonal lemma etc).
From: choy@skorpio.usask.ca (I am a terminator.)
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: What is the remodelling rule?
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:28:17 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: skorpio.usask.ca

What is the remodelling rule of classical propositional calculus?
There's a screwup in my textbook.


-- 

Henry Choy
choy@cs.usask.ca

What rolls down stairs alone or in pairs            This has been brought to 
Rolls over your neighbor's dog?                     you by the numbers 4
What's great for a snack and fits on your back?     and 9 and the letter P.
It's Log, Log, Log!  -- "The Log Song", from            -- Big Bird
                         Ren & Stimpy

Math is tough!       -- Barbie
Xref: sparky sci.logic:2635 comp.lang.prolog:2448 sci.math:18747
From: cmenzel@kbssun1.tamu.edu (Chris Menzel)
Newsgroups: sci.logic,comp.lang.prolog,sci.math
Subject: Re: Definitive temporal logic source
Date: 25 Jan 1993 23:08:57 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: kbssun1.tamu.edu
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes) writes:
: In article <1993Jan23.114811.28054@city.cs> mb108@cs.city.ac.uk (omo ADELAKUN T K) writes:
: >Can anyone point me to a very good text on temporal logic? In the same
: >vein, does anyone know of a temporal logic interpreter (something along
: >the lines of Prolog or extensions thereto)?
: >
: >Thanx for any responses - which I'd prefer to come to me direct so I can 
: >post a summary.
: >
: >Toyin.
: 
: I won't commit myself on "very good", but the book I have on temporal
: and other modal logics is "A Manual of Intensional Logic" (I can't
: recall the author) from the Center for the Study of Language and
: Information at Stanford.

It's by Johan van Bentham; it's nice, but a much more complete source
is his Reidel book The Logic of Time.
Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.math,comp.lang.prolog
From: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
Subject: Re: Definitive temporal logic source
Organization: Boise State University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:42:41 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.114811.28054@city.cs> mb108@cs.city.ac.uk (omo ADELAKUN T K) writes:
>Can anyone point me to a very good text on temporal logic? In the same
>vein, does anyone know of a temporal logic interpreter (something along
>the lines of Prolog or extensions thereto)?
>
>Thanx for any responses - which I'd prefer to come to me direct so I can 
>post a summary.
>
>Toyin.

I won't commit myself on "very good", but the book I have on temporal
and other modal logics is "A Manual of Intensional Logic" (I can't
recall the author) from the Center for the Study of Language and
Information at Stanford.  It seems to have an adequate discussion of
the topic.  E-mail me if you want the author's name later; my terminal
and said book live in different places.


-- 
The opinions expressed		|     --Sincerely,
above are not the "official"	|     M. Randall Holmes
opinions of any person		|     Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
or institution.			|     holmes@opal.idbsu.edu
Xref: sparky sci.logic:2628 sci.philosophy.tech:4926
From: zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: An Ethical Metaquestion, or a meta-Ethical Question
Keywords: Ethics, Decidability
Date: 22 Jan 93 18:54:13 GMT
Organization: The Phallogocentric Cabal

In article <1993Jan20.160010.2048@panix.com> 
jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb) writes:

>In <1993Jan20.030131.19565@husc3.harvard.edu>
>zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:

MZ:
>>Now, let us
>>consider an {\it apposite God}, one who is commited to helping exactly
>>those who do {\it not} help themselves.  We bear in mind that, unlike
>>Russell's barber, who is free to shrug off as impossible his duty to
>>shave those, and only those, who do not shave themselves, the
>>perfection of God requires that he actually do everything he is
>>commited to do.  Then is our God under obligation to help Himself?

JK:
>Is this a demonstration that a being that would make such a commitment
>would not be a perfect being and therefore would not be God?

Yes, in the same sense that Russell's Paradox is a demonstration that
any theory that contains an analogue of Frege's Axiom V, is _ipso facto_
not a consistent theory, and therefore is not useful as a foundation of
mathematics.  The point of my example, however, is that any God would be
unable to make such a commitment, and so would necessarily fall short of
omnipotence or perfection, just as He would fall short of omniscience in
virtue of the Montague-Kaplan paradox.

cordially,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Le cul des femmes est monotone comme l'esprit des hommes."
Newsgroups: sci.logic,sci.math
From: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
Subject: Re: Self-reference.
Organization: Boise State University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:25:08 GMT

In article <TORKEL.93Jan28035348@anhur.sics.se> torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen) writes:
>In article <C1JHyx.C96@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz> wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz 
>(Bill Taylor) writes:
>
>  [Quoting an article on self-reference]
>
> >.....one can hardly expect to learn much. One just gets the thrill of 
> >something amusing, but also whimsical, confused, and a little bit unnerving -
> >intriguing but not worth pursuing seriously - something basically
hollow.

How true!  Who could possibly be interested in the Cantor theorem, the
insolubility of the halting problem, and other such whimsical results!

>
>  This kind of comment demonstrates the amazing extent to which the
>Hofstadter-style mystification of self-reference has taken root even
>among mathematicians. They think to find unnerving whimsy in simple
>mathematics...

Simple?!?

>



-- 
The opinions expressed		|     --Sincerely,
above are not the "official"	|     M. Randall Holmes
opinions of any person		|     Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
or institution.			|     holmes@opal.idbsu.edu
From: jnjohann@immd1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Jan Johannsen)
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Proof Theory reference needed
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:10:35 GMT
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui1k.informatik.uni-erlangen.de


The following seems to be a folklore result in Proof Theory:

Let PA be (first-order) Peano Arithmetic, and let G be the set of all
Pi_1-sentences  true in the standard model N. 
Then PA and PA + G have the same set of provably recursive functions.

Could someone please give me a hint where to find a proof of this
fact ?

Thanks    Jan

---
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"[Die Mathematik] steht ja "uber allem. Die Werke von Abel oder Kronecker sind
 heute genauso gut wie vor vierhundert Jahren, und so wird es immer sein.
 Es entstehen wohl neue Wege, doch die alten f"uhren weiter. Sie schliessen
 sich nicht. Dort ... dort ist die Ewigkeit. Nur die Mathematik hat keine
 Angst vor ihr."
                   Stanislaw Lem, "Transfer"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Jan Johannsen, Universit"at Erlangen, IMMD 1 
                Martensstrasse 3, D-8520 Erlangen, Germany   
                          Tel.:  49-9131-857688                         
               Email:  johannsen@informatik.uni-erlangen.de  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
From: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen Grossman)
Subject: Re: Stephen Grossman
Reply-To: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU
Organization: UMASS DARTMOUTH, NO. DARTMOUTH, MA.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:41:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.202625.27001@ulrik.uio.no>, solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg) writes:
>In article <TORKEL.93Jan21205323@bast.sics.se>, torkel@sics.se (Torkel
>Franzen) writes:
>|> In article <1993Jan21.183010.22929@ulrik.uio.no> solan@smaug.uio.no 
>|> (Svein Olav G. Nyberg) writes:
>|> 
>|>    >and will like Voltaire defend even his right to be met by proper
>|>    >argument, and not simply abusive language.
>|> 
>|>   I haven't noticed Voltaire saying anything about Grossman. But you are
>|> a bit hasty, surely, in speaking of his "right to be met by proper
>|> argument". Why do suppose that we have a right to be met by "proper
>|> argument" (whatever this term may mean to you), whatever abusive twaddle
>|> we spout on the net ourselves?
>
>I think it is important first to show that the guy is spreading
>"abusive twaddle" on the net, however obvious it may seem to one-
>self, regardless of person, for two reasons:
>
>1. We're showing the guy exactly what he is doing, which is
>   a stronger corrective than mere shouting and swearing. He
>   thereby gets a chance to improve himself, 

SG	Improve myself? I don't understand...That's like discussing God as 
potential...

instead of perhaps
>   being just ignorant about what he's doing.
>
>2. It _might_ have been misunderstood, and gives the guy a chance
>   to defend himself. If he cannot defend his actions without
>   further abusive twaddle, we have positively shown him what he
>   has done.
>
>In any case, the outcome is better than immediate fight.
>
>I do agree, however, that if the person in question ignore the
>good attempts and/or go on like before, then he might be told
>what your gut feelings towards him are. But first telling a
>person what he is actually doing wrong might save the newsgroup
>from a lot of flaming, and will therefore be in our own best
>interests.

SG	I have a radical suggestion: discuss philosophy instead of me.
________________________________________________________________________________
	"In that world, you'll be able to rise in the morning with the spirit
you had known in your childhood: that spirit of eagerness, adventure and cer-
tainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe."
                                                              AYN RAND
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Grossman <PMSC13SG@UMASSD.EDU>
================================================================================
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Subject: Re: War!
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:22:48 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


In article <1993Jan21.203652.27457@ulrik.uio.no>, solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg) writes:
|> In article <C17xzE.BIq@unx.sas.com>, sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary
|> Merrill) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> In article <C17rAJ.HFL@umassd.edu>, pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen
|> Grossman) writes:
|> |> |> 
|> |> |> 	It would be nice if my intellect were necessary to deal with others' 
|> |> |> posts but the level of "argument" and even insult is, for the most
|> part, so low 
|> |> |> that I can let my subconscious do the work.
|> |> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> I swear I've heard this before.  Do we know that Grossman is *not*
|> |> Rush Limbaugh?  Has anyone every seen both at the same time?
|> 
|> There are basically two ways to interact socially:
|> War and trade.
|> 
|> When exchanging ideas, we are trying to do trade. It
|> is a shame that what goes on in netland is still mostly
|> wars. Wars of the worst kind, often - trenchwars.
|> 
|> So, trying to keep the right spirit: Grossman is true enough
|> conceited in his response above, but he is also at constant
|> war with everyone else. This time, he fired BACK.
|> 
|> Give peace a chance, guys. That goes not only for Merrill, but
|> for Grossman, too.
|> 
|> Solan

I think you need to look back over prior postings concerning the
comic genius hypothesis.  I have become convinced of the truth of
this hypothesis.  The hypothesis is the only one currently under
consideration that explains (and in fact quite accurately predicts)
all of the Grossman phenomena.  Thus we are compelled by rationality
(the very rationality appealed to in Grossman's own postings) to
accept this hypothesis.  That being so, your interpretation of
my (and other's) postings re Grossman is incorrect.  These are
intended in a cooperative fashion to provide fodder for the comic
genius.  Without such raw material even the most genius of comics
ultimately will wither.

Your current problem is that you (like many of us) have initially
been taken in by the cleverness of Grossman.  But look at the
evidence.  Grossman is a truly funny guy.  I would compare most
of his postings to some of the best Monty Python skits concerning
philosophy.  This isn't war.  It's entertainment!
-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
From: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen Grossman)
Subject: Re: Schools, philosophy of science, epistemology
Reply-To: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU
Organization: UMASS DARTMOUTH, NO. DARTMOUTH, MA.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:30:26 GMT

In article <C17xzE.BIq@unx.sas.com>, sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill) writes:
>
>In article <C17rAJ.HFL@umassd.edu>, pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen Grossman) writes:
>|> 
>|> 	It would be nice if my intellect were necessary to deal with others' 
>|> posts but the level of "argument" and even insult is, for the most part, so low 
>|> that I can let my subconscious do the work.
>|> 
>
>I swear I've heard this before.  Do we know that Grossman is *not*
>Rush Limbaugh?  Has anyone every seen both at the same time?
>-- 
>Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
>SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
>sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm

SG	Im Gary Merrill. 
________________________________________________________________________________
	"In that world, you'll be able to rise in the morning with the spirit
you had known in your childhood: that spirit of eagerness, adventure and cer-
tainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe."
                                                              AYN RAND
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Grossman <PMSC13SG@UMASSD.EDU>
================================================================================
From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Searle on animal consciousness
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:45:08 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com


In article <1993Jan27.174733.3100@cs.ucf.edu>, clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke) writes:
|> In article <1k1mj7INN8cu@shelley.u.washington.edu>  
|> forbis@stein.u.washington.edu (Gary Forbis) writes:
|> > In article <1k0r1tINN5fn@cannelloni.cis.ohio-state.edu>  
|> chandra@cis.ohio-state.edu (B Chandrasekaran) writes:
|> > >Would you say that a patient under anesthesia is in pain, he just
|> > >doesn't feel it? I think that would be an odd use of the term.
|> >  
|> > I think that if the anesthetic prevents signals from entering the brain then
|> > no pain is felt but am less willing to claim a general anesthetic blocks pain
|> > when it might be the case that it merely blocks the ability to report pain.
|> 
|> The drug scopolamine is often given to women in labor since it
|> doesn't really make them unconscious so they can cooperate at
|> least a bit: "push" and all that.  The benefit is that the women
|> don't remember the experience/pain afterward.

I didn't think that this stuff (also called "twilight sleep" was used
much -- if at all -- any more).  I think it was popular 30 or more
years ago.  The question of what the benefit is and *whose* it is can
be an interesting one.  It does not appear to be of much benefit to
the woman, but more to the OB.  However, women I have talked to who
have delivered in this manner seem to feel it was beneficial -- *as
though* it were an anesthetic (most don't realize it wasn't).

|> I can't speak from experience (my wife had "natural" with a touch
|> of demerol), but I understand that women under scopolamine are 
|> quite verbal, cursing the men who did this to them etc. etc.

My wife had "natural" childbirth three times.  However, she was
quite "verbal" as well.

|> Corollary question.  If you don't remember, in what sense
|> are you conscious?

At this point in my life there is a *lot* I don't remember any
longer.  I do not infer from this that I was unconscious for most
of my life.

Here's another corollary question (one we used to kick around
in the graduate commons room a bit):  Suppose someone offered you
[insert absurd sum of money or some other desideratum] to be
tortured painfully and at length under the conditions that (a) no
permanent harm or disfigurement would result, and (b) that you
would be given a drug so that although the torture would be felt,
you would have no memory of it after it was over.  Would you take
the job?  If not, why not?  Your answer to this question should
at least be consistent with your answer to the original corollary
above.

-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech