http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/ DC Proof Users' Group Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:13:14 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/165 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/165 (I have tried to send this twice already without apparent success. Apologizing in advance for any duplication.) Below are the correct URL's for the proofs Sat, 29 Sep 2007 05:39:16 GMT dcproof1 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/164 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/164 Dear members, I have included three new, very brief proofs illustrating a set theoretic interpretation of the classical syllogism in the latest version of the Mon, 30 Apr 2007 02:32:08 GMT dcproof1 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/163 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/163 Dear members, I have been working on possible enhancements to DC Proof that I hope will make it easier to create recursive definitions of sets and functions. Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:06:03 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/162 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/162 Effective Immediately New Release of DC Proof, dated 2006-10-24 Includes: 1. Fixed bug in Universal Generalization module that would, on rare occasions, result Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:45:51 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/161 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/161 ... (lines ... Sep. ... to ... [snip] My proof of Sep 13 was based on a construction of the set of functions of two variables mapping NxN -> N, and then taking Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:12:17 GMT Thomas Heye http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/160 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/160 Hi Dan, ... Thanks for the flowers ;-). But in fact it's your construction of Sep. 13. The main reason for removing the condition "(a,b,c) e n3" was to ease Wed, 11 Oct 2006 04:51:36 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/159 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/159 ... for ... definition ... Thomas, I like your straightfoward construction of the add function(lines 18 - 27). It is much superior to the one I posted here Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:29:08 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/158 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/158 Hi Dan, here's what I proved so far in constructing the add function. By the way, I think it's remarkable that the function used in the construction is Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:27:09 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/157 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/157 Hi Dan, here's the 'commutativity' proof of the add function-- I'm not quite sure if 'symmetric function' is the correct term for it. Regards, Thomas [Download Mon, 09 Oct 2006 04:00:38 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/156 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/156 ... (How) ... thought ... I ... proof ... In addition to all direct references to a selected line of proof, the Delete All References command will also delete Sun, 08 Oct 2006 20:55:38 GMT Thomas Heye http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/155 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/155 Hi, recently I noticed that 'delete all references' also deletes statements even if they don't reference the line being deleted. (How) can I prevent that? I Mon, 25 Sep 2006 03:30:17 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/154 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/154 Hi Dan, I hope these proofs are of interest to you :-). The 'details' of the proof are contained in 6 separate files: - 'addcancelable_short' extends Mon, 18 Sep 2006 20:37:17 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/153 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/153 Effectively immediately New release of DC Proof 1.0 includes: 1. Change to User Reference Guide. Added note to section on Substitution Rule: "Please note that Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:24:54 GMT Dan Christensen http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/152 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/152 Hi Thomas, The usual order precedence for algebraic operators is built into DC Proof. In this case r=c+a+b is interpreted as r=(c+a)+b, the left- most + Mon, 18 Sep 2006 12:40:45 GMT Thomas Heye http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/151 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dcproof/message/151 Hi list, there's something odd about substitution: Suppose you have r=c+a+b and x=a+b then substituting x in the 1st equation is impossible; whereas it works