[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Inconsistent Theories

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:17:19 -0600
Message-id: <1265667439.2539.119.camel@prior>
On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 11:54 -0800, Rich Cooper wrote:
> Example: Let the two theories be:
> TrueS(F,x)   := <expression1 of terminals x>;
> FalseS(F,x)  := <expression2 of terminals x>;    (01)

I don't understand what it means to say these are theories.  They look
like clauses in a BNF.  I suppose a BNF is a sort of theory, but it's a
theory that describes the grammar of a specific language.  But the left
sides here look like atomic statements in a first order language, not a
class of expressions.    (02)

> So that there are two theories: TrueS(F,x) is the set of Things which are
> believed (with current knowledge) to be in the set F for terminal vector x,
> while FalseS(F,x) is the set of Things which are believed NOT to be in F(x).    (03)

How can you possible get that from the above?    (04)

-chris    (05)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

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