/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11252902
I don't think anybody thinks that.

I found that Chrysippus (from the "allegedly died of laughter" meme image) had some neat logic even 200 BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysippus#Conditional_propositions

The last primitive in that table is a "more likely" expression. I wonder if that can be captured by a subjective logic approach, which are also cool but virtually unknown afaik, one modern formal one being
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_logic

I wonder if there'd be any merit of breaking up your logic to take into account those thing, e.g. as in time-dependent modal logics, as in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_logic#Temporal_operators

or whether those things are best kept for math _written in_ that logic. I.e. I wonder if you should keep your logic slim and mathematical axioms characterize your math, or whether it might be worth a try to have a more bloated logic

For what it's worth, I also came across this
https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3901
>A countable definable set of reals containing no definable elements
scary