Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Pedantry time

  1. Oct 10, 2014 #1
    Do the logicians/mathematicians agree with the picture's claim?

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 10, 2014 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Seems fine, technically inhabited refers to living things but it's not such an unusual use that it doesn't make sense.
  4. Oct 10, 2014 #3
    So, AFAIK there are nonfunctional robots on Venus, for example.

    Furthermore, one may read this as "nothing other than robots inhabits this planet" in which that statement is arguably true for any planet devoid of life and robots, like Saturn, but that's a bit of a stretch in how the statement is interpreted.

    One may even be completely smug and say that nothing besides dragons lives on Saturn.
  5. Oct 10, 2014 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    You've lost me. How can it be true for planets that have no robots when the statement is that there are robots present?
  6. Oct 10, 2014 #5
    Well, it really can't, reasonably.

    But I think the existence of nonfunctional robots is a valid critique.
  7. Oct 10, 2014 #6

    Doug Huffman

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    An assertion of non-existence can only be sustained by an examination of the entire universe of discussion. Beware the Black Swan hiding in inductive inference.
  8. Oct 10, 2014 #7
    Beam me up, Scotty. There's nothing but a bunch of whiny, selfish and greedy primates down here. Let's go to mars and cruise with the cool robots.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook