Recent content by Agaton

Church's thesis says that 'every effectively computable function is recursively computable'. The meaning of the statement is clear enough. In more simpler words, it says that every function that have an algorithm is computable by Turing machine. My question is that what is this...

Thanks honestrsewater, I am still reading about it...

I didn't get your points, so to understand it, i repeat the answer again: Part A: To prove the sentence α is not logically implied by the set S, we needed an interpretation which is a model for S, but not a model for α. The intendedinterpretation consists of a domain as: D={N U X}...

We have the following sentences which I translated them to FOL by using the language: Att(x) for "x attended the ceremony" Likes(x,y) for "x likes y" Rel(x,y) for "x is a relative of y" Ab(x) for "x is an abnormal relative" (a) Only all the normal relatives attended the wedding...

Do not we prove it when we check it with our model?!

Very expressive and helpful, I mean all your comments on this topic. Thank you. I need to work on FOL and resolution more, and this was a very good start point.

emmm, not sure but I think I need to determine the truth value of each sentence first, and then the truth value of the conditional, by using rules and equivalences. right?

Yes, that is standard interpretation. I do not think that we need to derive ∀x(odd(x) ⊃ even(s(x))). What is required, according to the question, is just to make some change to S. Isn't it?

I am not sure whether I understand it...even the one you already resolved, that is 3&4...

Thanks honestrosewater, There is a solution which is close to yours i think as below: We need an interpretation that is a model for S, but not a model for α. Let Interpretation = {D,I}, // D = domain , I = Interpretation with D = { N U X} I [X] = set of all odd integers...

Thanks a lot.

Thanks honestrosewater, I think we can suppose and domain with any interpretation, such that the interpretation is a model for S, bot not a model for α.

I haven't got any special rules, just trying to do this in FOL. I also do not know how to unify with constants. I saw a few examples in books, but this is much more complicated that those. Can you finish it please? Thanks

Thanks honestrosewater. I made some changes to sentences, and here it is together with the part B: a) Representing facts as sentences in FOL. (1) ∀x [(color (Shirt (x)) =green) → (age (huey) < age (x))] (2) ∀x [(age(x) = 5) → (design (shirt(x))= camel)] (3) Shirt(dewey) =...

Thanks, I just reviewed unification and substitution concept in resolution. Do I need to unify or substitute and variable? or do i need just to translate them to natural language and then resolve?! For example, Do I need to translate sentences 4 and 5 as: 4. That is not the case that z...