Awoke again this morning at 8ish mentally going over what I was planning to tell Frank about this "classically true" modality, how I was disappointed that it doesn't seem to actually pin down which connectives correspond across the intuitionistic/classical boundary. Then I randomly got out a sheet of paper to see which of ~CA and C~A implied each other. To my great surprise, they turned out to be equivalent, along with the equivalences C(A & B) = CA & CB and C(A => B) = CA => CB. So I guess C being a homorphism across a connective is a good condition to require that the classical and intuitionist rules for a connective mesh right. Still it would have been nicer to have it expressed by one of the cut eliminations.
Awoke again this morning at 8ish mentally going over what I was planning to tell Frank about this "classically true" modality, how I was disappointed that it doesn't seem to actually pin down which connectives correspond across the intuitionistic/classical boundary. Then I randomly got out a sheet of paper to see which of ~CA and C~A implied each other. To my great surprise, they turned out to be equivalent, along with the equivalences C(A & B) = CA & CB and C(A => B) = CA => CB. So I guess C being a homorphism across a connective is a good condition to require that the classical and intuitionist rules for a connective mesh right. Still it would have been nicer to have it expressed by one of the cut eliminations.
-
(no subject)
Some further progress cleaning up the https://xkcd.com/1360/ -esque augean stables that is my hard drive. Tomato chicken I made a couple days ago…
-
(no subject)
Did some personal archaeology. Helped a little with laundry. Threw some chicken, onions, tomato, stock, peppers in the slow cooker and hopefully…
-
(no subject)
Dinner with akiva and dannel at nuevo portal in carroll gardens. Ate a pile of chicken stew and rice and beans and maduros, good times. I do miss…
- Post a new comment
- 5 comments
- Post a new comment
- 5 comments
