Results 1 to 7 of 7

Math Help - new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    12

    new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    Id like to inform you of a manuscript I have (pre-)published in the arxiv site at

    [1107.4696] A different approach to logic.

    The paper is about an approach to logic that differs from the standard first-order logic and other known approaches. It should be a new approach Ive created proposing to obtain a general and unifying approach to logic and a faithful model of human mathematical deductive process.
    Further details in the abstract and introduction (and in the paper, of course).
    The latest version will be online
    at Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT.

    Mauro Avon
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Joined
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    I think you used MSWord and then converted to PDF. To tell you honestly, the symbols are not explicitly defined. I think the author must used LATEX in order to be more beautiful. I cannot comment the content yet but I will try to analyze your work.Thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    4
    Awards
    2

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    I am not competent to judge the veracity of the paper. However, I would point you to this interesting link that I think contains much wisdom. I would by no means discourage honest work, but I think this blog post has much to consider.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Grand Panjandrum
    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    someplace
    Posts
    14,972
    Thanks
    4

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    The point about LaTeX is interesting, so I might mention that at present I have abandoned the use of WYSIWYG word processors for everything other than reading .doc files that I am sent. Even my personal correspondence is now essentially in LaTeX (often via LyX or TeXmacs).

    However the failure to use LaTeX is irrelevant since OOo will export a document in LaTeX, and will translate MS Word equations into its native equation format on loading so given a Word document it can be translated into LaTeX fairly easily (last time I tried this some hand fettling was still required, but not much)

    CB
    Last edited by CaptainBlack; August 25th 2011 at 05:23 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    12

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    Yes, i used msword and not latex. Sorry for this .. i'm considering to convert it to latex but i don't know if and when this will be available. Currently i don't know latex and i have little time available, so a latex version will not be available in a short time.

    Since i don't know latex I don't know what is the time required to this conversion.

    For these reasons i hope to get a judgement on the content of the paper without having to convert it to latex.

    As regards the link posted by Ackbeet it's sure that point one (about using tex) applies to my document, but it's also sure there exist false positives to this rule, and many other false positives may exist simply because if you don't use tex it's much more difficult that people reads your paper.

    As regards the other points, i quickly read at them, and i don't see one clearly applying to my paper.

    Another interesting link is the following

    The Anti-Crackpot Index viXra log

    if you suggest someone is not a real scientist because they did not use TeX then you win 5 points more in the anti-crackpot index.

    I don't want to talk about methods to quickly determine if a paper is crackpot or not (or to quickly determine if someone is an anti-crackpot or not). I don't believe in this and i will not reply to this. Actually i think this is misleading and descouraging people who wants to obtain something better and not simply repeat what has already been said, relying on the unproven assumption that nothing better can be achieved.

    To judge a paper you simply have to read it and if you don't agree with it clearly state why.

    If someone will make interesting observations about the content of the paper, or state a well documented opinion about it, then i thank him in advance. I'll try to reply to this kind of observations when appropriate.

    Thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Grand Panjandrum
    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    someplace
    Posts
    14,972
    Thanks
    4

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    Quote Originally Posted by avonm View Post
    Yes, i used msword and not latex. Sorry for this .. i'm considering to convert it to latex but i don't know if and when this will be available. Currently i don't know latex and i have little time available, so a latex version will not be available in a short time.

    Since i don't know latex I don't know what is the time required to this conversion.

    For these reasons i hope to get a judgement on the content of the paper without having to convert it to latex.

    As regards the link posted by Ackbeet it's sure that point one (about using tex) applies to my document, but it's also sure there exist false positives to this rule, and many other false positives may exist simply because if you don't use tex it's much more difficult that people reads your paper.

    As regards the other points, i quickly read at them, and i don't see one clearly applying to my paper.

    Another interesting link is the following

    The Anti-Crackpot Index viXra log

    if you suggest someone is not a real scientist because they did not use TeX then you win 5 points more in the anti-crackpot index.

    I don't want to talk about methods to quickly determine if a paper is crackpot or not (or to quickly determine if someone is an anti-crackpot or not). I don't believe in this and i will not reply to this. Actually i think this is misleading and descouraging people who wants to obtain something better and not simply repeat what has already been said, relying on the unproven assumption that nothing better can be achieved.

    To judge a paper you simply have to read it and if you don't agree with it clearly state why.

    If someone will make interesting observations about the content of the paper, or state a well documented opinion about it, then i thank him in advance. I'll try to reply to this kind of observations when appropriate.

    Thanks.
    I did look at this briefly when it was originally posted and it showed no obvious signs of crackpottery which is why it is still here (but that means little). However it look as though it would take more time that I had/have available to go through in detail so I cannot make any definitive statements on its content. I had thought someone else might have looked at this more closely and commented.

    CB
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Grand Panjandrum
    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    someplace
    Posts
    14,972
    Thanks
    4

    Re: new paper about an interesting new approach to logic

    Quote Originally Posted by avonm View Post
    Another interesting link is the following

    The Anti-Crackpot Index viXra log

    if you suggest someone is not a real scientist because they did not use TeX then you win 5 points more in the anti-crackpot index.
    I would suggest that the compiler of this list had their tongue firmly in their cheek when they compiled this, I can recognise a target or two in there who are generaly rather good at the job.

    CB
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 18th 2011, 05:13 PM
  2. How would I approach this interesting probelm?
    Posted in the Advanced Statistics Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 9th 2011, 11:07 PM
  3. Can someone check my logic (sentential logic)
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 13th 2010, 03:30 AM
  4. Any approach other than axiomatic approach to Real Numbers
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 11th 2010, 12:21 PM
  5. what is the appropriate approach?
    Posted in the Advanced Statistics Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 11th 2008, 05:39 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum