History: Bunches

Source of version: 6

Bunches “Bunch” is a cover term for formally treated pluralities. There are several realizations of this formalism: plural reference and quantification, L(esniewski)-sets, applied C(antor)-sets (with atoms but without the null set), mereological sums. All of these can be ways for dealing with plurals within the language of logic. They all share the following theses, which are just listed here, without any attempt to divide them into axioms, theorems and definitions (though some are probably obvious). No claim is made that this list is complete, even as a basis, but it does seem to be consistent (relative to standard set theory – not that that is altogether reassuring). The notions treated here are “in” – the relation between pluralities and what make them up, “+” – the device for creating new pluralities by combining existing ones, “I” – “is an individual” (a bunch with no further components), “-F” (and “F-“) – distributive predication (“collective predication,” including personal predication for individuals, is the norm), “F*” – “participates in Fing.” a in a (reflexive) a in b and b in a => a=b (asymmetric) a in b and b in c => a in c (transitive) [[Aa][[Eb] b in a a in b or b in a or [[Ec](a in c and b in c) The one that surely exists is a+b a+a = a a+b = b+a a+(b+c) = (a+b)+c a in a+b b in a+b c in a+b => c = a+b or [[Ed] a+b = c+d c in a+b => c = a+b or c in a or c in b or [[Ed] a+b = c+d a+b = a => b in a a in b => a+c in b+c xI <=> [[Aa: a in x] x in a xI <=>[[Aa: a in x] x = a [[Aa][[Ex: x in a](a = x or [[Eb] a = x+b) (Here we use the convention of taking quantifiers involving x, y , z as being short for quantifiers restricted to individuals, so here [[Ex: xI and x in a].) (Every bunch breaks down completely into individuals and there are is no empty bunch.) [[Ex] x in a (This follows from the above but says more explicitly that no bunch is empty) (The above foundation thesis does not quite work as intended, since, if a is an infinite bunch, we never get to all the individuals of the bunch by the finite process of peeling them off one at a time. I suppose we could do something with cardinality -- which we probably need anyhow -- and then work by induction, but that does eem to bring in a lot more extraneous stuff than really needed for right now.) x in a+b => x in a or x in b a-F <=> [[Ax: x in a] xF (the “-“ is always on the predicate side, so for a following term, it would be “F-a.” Note: different terms may have F as predicate in different ways: aF-b, a-Fb, a-F-b, and aFb are all possible, even if b = a.) a-F and b in a => b-F [[Ea] a=x+y aF => a-*F (ever member of a collective particpates in what the collective does) (like -, * goes between argument and predicate -- pending a better notation)

History

Enable pagination rows per page

HTML diff Side-by-side diff Side-by-side diff by characters Inline diff Inline diff by characters Full side-by-side diff Full side-by-side diff by characters Full inline diff Full inline diff by characters Unified diff Side-by-side view HTML diff Side-by-side diff Advanced

Information	Version
Fri 02 of Dec, 2005 21:40 GMT pycyn from 70.230.168.167	8
Thu 01 of Dec, 2005 21:51 GMT pycyn from 70.230.168.167	7
Thu 01 of Dec, 2005 21:50 GMT pycyn from 70.230.168.167	6
Mon 28 of Nov, 2005 19:52 GMT pycyn from 68.88.34.50	5
Mon 28 of Nov, 2005 19:47 GMT pycyn from 68.88.34.50	4
Fri 11 of Nov, 2005 19:40 GMT pycyn from 68.88.34.50	3
Fri 11 of Nov, 2005 19:36 GMT pycyn from 68.88.34.50	2
Fri 11 of Nov, 2005 19:30 GMT pycyn from 68.88.34.50	1

Select action to perform with checked... Remove OK