[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] {Disarmed} Re: OWL and lack of identifiers

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:22:43 -0400
Message-id: <462D5BE3.5000201@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Wacek,    (01)

Of course,    (02)

 > Even the basic elements of logic are may not be invariants...    (03)

Every invariant is an invariant with respect to a particular
transformation or set of transformations.  The operators of
FOL --  and, or, not, implies, exists, forall, ... -- happen
to be invariant with respect to a very large number of
transformations.    (04)

Whenever you find something that is preserved under such a wide
range of transformations, it is likely to be important.  But
that does not mean it will be preserved under *all* possible
transformations.    (05)

John    (06)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>