Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why does AoC implying LEM mean you can't use LEM in constructive maths?

EDIT: misread



Constructive mathematics by it's nature does not use LEM. The idea is that proof of existance must be done by construction of the object in question. LEM implies DNE, which means existance can be shown by showing non-existance is not the case.

EDIT: Apologies, misunderstood.


I said that if you don't want to use LEM in constructive maths you must also give up AOC, since AOC -> LEM.


Oh right. Also hi siraben didn't notice it was you.


Hello! Nice to see another IRCer :)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: