Sujet : Re: Collatz conjecture question
De : ross.a.finlayson (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Ross Finlayson)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 24. Mar 2025, 17:25:01
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <Cl-dnbHui9T-Gnz6nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
On 03/24/2025 09:09 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 03/24/2025 08:59 AM, Jim Burns wrote:
On 3/24/2025 10:47 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:
Le 24/03/2025 à 09:38, efji a écrit :
>
He could teach you how
a=b =/=> a^2=b^2
>
a=25 b=25
>
a=b
>
5²=25
>
(-5)²=25
>
Then -5=5
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
⎛
⎜ Affirming the consequent
⎜
⎜ In propositional logic, affirming the consequent
⎜ (also known as converse error, fallacy of the converse,
⎜ or confusion of necessity and sufficiency)
⎜ is a formal fallacy (or an invalid form of argument)
⎜ that is committed when,
⎜ in the context of an indicative conditional statement,
⎜ it is stated that because the consequent is true,
⎝ therefore the antecedent is true.
>
>
>
>
>
Doesn't that round-file material implication?
Or, you just pick when it's so?
>
>
It's called "relevance logic" and for the modal logic,
Chrysippus long ago gave a vaccine against Plotinus.
... and Aristotle can well employ Chrysippus' modal moods.
It's sick.
Collatz conjecture question
Re: Collatz conjecture question