Reputation
Next privilege 250 Rep.
View close votes
Badges
5
Newest
 Tumbleweed
Impact
~432 people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 0 votes cast
Nov
28
awarded  Tumbleweed
Nov
21
revised Rota's Exoteric Slogan and Univalent Foundations
add link to univalent foundations, correct wording and ∃ quantifier
Nov
21
asked Rota's Exoteric Slogan and Univalent Foundations
Oct
11
awarded  Commentator
Oct
11
comment Principia Mathematica Part VI “Quantity” vs Part IV “Relation Arithmetic”
I'm considering deleting this question and reposting a version of it tailored to the computer science stackexchange. Is that the most appropriate place for this kind of question and is deleting it the most appropriate thing to do in preparation for the tailored reposting?
Oct
10
revised Principia Mathematica Part VI “Quantity” vs Part IV “Relation Arithmetic”
Correct the initial PM reference to Part "IV".
Oct
9
asked Principia Mathematica Part VI “Quantity” vs Part IV “Relation Arithmetic”
May
21
revised Relative Identity vs Set Theory
G Solomon writes Russell's Relation Arithmetic off as subsumed by model theory whereas Etter addresses it in relative identity's implications in Membership and Identity.
May
21
comment Relative Identity vs Set Theory
Etter's earlier paper, explicitly addressing relation numbers and arithmetic, that led to his relative identity theory was Relation Arithmetic Revived. I think it an adequate rejoinder to G Solomon's ‎1989 paper "What Became of Russell's 'Relation Arithmetic'" in which Solomon seems to write Relation Arithmetic off as subsumed by model theory. Etter does explicitly address model theory in Membership and Identity. boundary.org/bi/articles/Relation-arithmetic_Revived_v3.pdf
May
19
comment Relative Identity vs Set Theory
I hesitate to introduce it here, but in late 2012 I was, with the help of his home care nurse, able to scan a copy of Etter's unfinished paper Membership and Identity when it became apparent that he would never finish it due to loss of mental capacity (which had set in some years earlier with his beloved wife's death) and declining health. As it is unfinished it may have serious problems and should therefore not be taken as representative of his work. boundaryinstitute.org/bi/articles/Membership_&_Identity.pdf
May
18
asked Relative Identity vs Set Theory
Jul
24
awarded  Scholar
Jul
24
accepted The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
Jul
24
comment The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
OK, without objection I'll call yours the correct answer. Indeed, it is better to have a name that is most widely used by people with {$\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ } in mind as long as it isn't formally misleading (except according to a few Wikipedian pedants).
Jul
24
comment The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
The nice thing about calling them "Euclidean Hurwitz Algebras" is that by naming them for the theorem that identifies the set {$\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$} one is providing a formal definition that is not subject to misunderstandings.
Jul
24
answered The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
Jul
24
comment The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
The Frobenius theorem leaves out $\mathbb{O}$.
Jul
21
revised The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
Provide links to wikipedia
Jul
20
asked The Name for $\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{H}$ and $\mathbb{O}$ Exclusively Algebras?
Oct
19
comment Normed Division Algebras and Combinatorial Hierarchy
An introduction to Noyes's bitstring physics: arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9707020.pdf wherein he associates the four levels of the combinatorial hierarchy with the four scale constants for the superstrong, strong, electroweak and gravitational interactions respectively.