| CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 13:17:42 GMT
Server: Apache/2.4.41 (Ubuntu)
Last-Modified: Wed, 06 Aug 2025 15:31:48 GMT
ETag: "36a4-63bb40a0adf9f-gzip"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Length: 3791
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Type: text/shitpost : The implicational fragment of logic
Content-Type: text/shitpost
|
I have another blog that doesn't suck. Archive:
Comments disabled |
Subject: The implicational fragment of logic
Path: you!your-host!walldrug!epicac!ihnp4!hal9000!plovergw!plover!shitpost!mjd Date: 2018-08-27T15:18:50 Newsgroup: alt.binaries.implicational-fragment Message-ID: <3c14f4b8728f9d4b@shitpost.plover.com> Content-Type: text/shitpost Even after all these years, the implicational fragment of logic still has the ability to surprise me. Today I was surprised to observe that: $$((a\to b)\to a) \to (a\to b) \to b$$ is a theorem of logic. It was no longer surprising after I thought about it: if !!a\to b!! implies !!a!!, then it also implies formula that is implied by !!a!!, but !!a\to b!! itself shows that !!b!! is one of those formulas. (As a term of combinatory logic, this is simply !!S I!!, so I wonder how I never noticed before.)
|
