Mindly.Social

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

Friedrich Wilhelm Grafe<a href="https://mas.to/@tg9541" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@tg9541</a> <a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/bookstodon" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@bookstodon</a> <a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/philosophy" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@philosophy</a> yes, agree in a way. but do not see a win in playing off those two against each other, as later (after their common work PM) their work developed rather independently in more or less complementary areas, sometimes overlapping in <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilSci" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilSci</a> topics.E.g., if one focusses in <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/philosophy" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#philosophy</a> first of all on questions of <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/ontology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#ontology</a> (of science), ANW's process ontology will be much more impressive than say the duplicating entities of logical constructs in 'logical atomism' (which imop is a late and needless sin of BR). If, on the other hand, the main focus is <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/logic" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#logic</a> and logic related <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/epistemology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#epistemology</a> and/or <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilMath" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilMath</a>, there is roughly anything deeper and more worth considering than the theory of incomplete symbols; and perhaps no more careful and penetrating study than the ramified theory of types as developed from the circulus vitiosus argument, even when this theory was abandoned in the sequel for independent reasons.

Friedrich Wilhelm Grafe<a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/philsci" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#philsci</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/philmath" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#philmath</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/epistemology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#epistemology</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilosophyOfLogic" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilosophyOfLogic</a>happy to have my most current research paper now approved as a fixed preprint at Cambridge Open Engage <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/engage/coe/article-details/67063c69cec5d6c142aac4e0" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.cambridge.org/engage/coe/article-details/67063c69cec5d6c142aac4e0</a>

Sylvia Wenmackers 🦉🍀For an example in a <a href="https://scholar.social/tags/PhilMath" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilMath</a> paper, I'm looking into this sum: Sum[(-1)^(l + 1) 2^2^l, {l, 0, k}] for odd k. It diverges fast & I have values for k up to 9, but I'm wondering if there exists a closed form for it. I tried some techniques from Concrete Mathematics (to no avail) and Wolfram Alpha exceeded computation time. Probably I shouldn't expect a closed form due to the iterated exponent.Suggestions? Or could someone check it for me in Mathematica, please? 💡➕ :boost_requested: <a href="https://scholar.social/tags/ICanHazSums" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#ICanHazSums</a>

Friedrich Wilhelm Grafemy current (still draft) paper is aboutobject references in purportedly truth value definite sentencesthink there's something good in it ... 😅 <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/nontology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#nontology</a><a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilosophyOfLogic" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilosophyOfLogic</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/AppliedLogic" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#AppliedLogic</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilMath" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilMath</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilSci" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilSci</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilosophyOfMathematics" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilosophyOfMathematics</a> <a href="https://fediphilosophy.org/tags/PhilosophyOfScience" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PhilosophyOfScience</a><a href="https://philarchive.org/rec/GRAOAN" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://philarchive.org/rec/GRAOAN</a>

Recent searches

Search options

Administered by:

Server stats:

#philmath