Quote:

Originally Posted by The Principles of Mathematics (1903) by Bertrand Russell Chapter I. Definition of Pure Mathematics Pure Mathematics is the class of all propositions of the form “p implies q,” where p and q are propositions containing one or more variables, the same in the two propositions, and neither p nor q contains any constants except logical constants. And logical constants are all notions definable in terms of the following: Implication, the relation of a term to a class of which it is a member, the notion of such that, the notion of relation, and such further notions as may be involved in the general notion of propositions of the above form. In addition to these, mathematics uses a notion which of the propositions which it considers, namely is not a constituentthe notion of truth. |

*p implies q" when the notion of truth is in neither p nor q?*

*Russell's project was doomed before it began!*

We ought ask ourself the question what do p and q have to do with implication?

To imply denotes the connotations of involvement with the subject of reason.

Definition therefore is where the project of the philosophy of mathematics is derailed.

Is maths numbers or geometry, is it units in numbers of points or lines or volumes or times?

More often than not the arrow of time is going every direction at once day to day.

Since within the implications are the acts of predication and its inverse prediction.

Why is predication separated from prediction by a one and divisions symbol?

The action or duty performed by predication as a noun becomes all the more of import.

To import an idea into the set of all ideas is popularly labelled ideology or study of ideas.

Prediction of outcomes from within the domain of the ideology of mathematics,

Is not any easy subject to tackle since there is no consistency to definition.

We may try to organise the changes possible into a list or table AKA periodicals.

But that list of names tells us nothing about the movements nor the numbers of atoms.

A name is a form of deceit like a person says water is H2O, yes but so what.

The fact is around 2/3 rd's of each person is water so what are the implications?

The solution that is body corporate that has two possible states, attract or repulse.

Fat is not soluble in water in the body corporate and since so what of the mathematics?

Can pure mathematics model that with a simple equation and subvert the moral agreement?

I think not except and to say that soap is made from fat upon addition of an base.

Salt is made from addition of an acid to a base therefore chemistry of reason.

The outcomes are predicable and by being predicable what's generated predictable.

Consistent and reliable is what I mean to say determined apriori as preaexistent.

Complete and whole at the level that is above the surface of the electron shells.

Therefore it is safe to assume that, that which is beneath that energy field is as well.

Colour as seen by the eye is made from the reflected light from off the surface of electrons.

What about transmitted light then and the excess energy as transmitted by photons?

Again we are considering that common ground that applies to all configurations.

That piece of architecture that very few of us know very well at all the electron.

Therefore the only subject in information theory that is incomplete and in-determinant,

Is us in that we are the ones found lacking when it comes to the information given.

## No comments:

Post a Comment