Talk:Predicate (mathematical logic)

message: Any chance of anyone explaining this so the average reader could get an understanding of what it means? Tyrenius 18:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Follow the new external link for an explanation.
S Sepp 14:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the reference, but that's hardly an acceptable solution to a poor article.  Hoping someone actually has this on their watch list and notices that the problem still exists. MJKazin (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ?

message: See Talk:Predicate (mathematics). --Abdull 11:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: The follwoing in the article does not accord with Atomic formula and is surely wrong
* In first-order logic, atomic formulae are called predicate variables.  A predicate can take the role as either a property or a relation between entities.  When P is a predicate on X, one sometimes says that P is a property of X.
— Philogos (talk)  22:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There were a lot of problems with the text, but I think I have removed most of them. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atomic formula 

message: Thus seems confusing:
*Informally, a predicate is a statement that may be true or false depending on the values of its variables.[citation needed] It can be thought of as an operator or function that returns a value that is either true or false.
better sruely would be
*Informally, a predicate is an operator or function that returns a value that is either true or false. depending on the values of its variables.
:I think it's better to say something like "a predicate can be represented by a function that ...". This avoids using the word "is" about the predicate. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting.  Then we have (a) predicate symbols(b) predicates (c) functions, and a predicate can be represented by a function. Eg 
* 'F' is a predicate symbol [type (a)]
* under an intepretation it, 'F', can be associated with a predicate, egs. prime, even [type (b)]
* the  prime, even and green can be represented by functions (from numbers to {t,f}
That gives us three ontological classes.  On the princile of Ackhams razor, would it not be simpler to say
* under an intepretation 'F', can be associated with a predicate, egs. prime, even which are functions (from numbers to {t,f}
— Philogos (talk)  01:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion

message: The following in para formal definition do not provide formal definitions of the term predicate.
* In propositional logic, atomic formulae are called propositional variables. 
* In first-order logic, an atomic formula consists of a predicate symbol applied to an appropriate number of terms. 
The article is about predicates not predicate symbols— Philogos (talk)  02:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  So the items quoted do not provide a formal definition of the term predicate. (not to be conmsuded with the term predicate symbol or predicate letter
"atomic formula and an atomic sentence" ???
I was reading the article, and it was reasonable to follow, until I came across mention of "atomic formula and an atomic sentence".
I've no idea what these are. No clue is given. What is this going on about?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.82.159 (talk) 10:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  formal definition 

message: In its current form, the article augments rather than reduces confusion.  To begin with, proposition and predicate are mixed up.  Simply put, using the notation of the article, P(x) is a proposition and P is a predicate.  This is the most commonly (although not universally) used terminology. The article should be  cleaned up to reflect this. Boute (talk) 07:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup needed