If you construct a pair of perpendicular lines, they intersect such that a pair of circles with a finite radius exist where each circle is tangent at two points to either line. Any circle tangent to both lines has a centre lying on the line bisecting one of the right angles.

As the circle radius increases (and the centre gets farther from the point of intersection of...

Logical argument using infinity]]>

As a layperson the abstract is quite enough for me.

Is spacetime a field?

http://www.spacetimesociety.org/conferences/2006/docs/Lehmkuhl.pdf]]>

Dogma: a new perspective]]>

So pick a driving ability scale and you devise a test to figure out a drivers score. It could encompass adherence percentage to the Highway Code, reaction time etc.. and it's scaled 1 to 10, 10 being the best. Person A's alround driving...

Law of reaction times]]>

This isn't a thread about logic or about the logic of the Law of Identity. So, please remember that in your replies.

Some context now...

The Law of Identity has been assumed as an axiom of logic since Aristotle some 2,400 years ago, but a few people here and there deny any validity to it. This is their constitutional right, of course, but some of them, possibly all of them even, may not in fact understand what...

The Law of Identity: What does it mean?]]>

There is no right or wrong, good or bad, only experience]]>

Each card has one capital letter (e.g. F, G, X etc.) on one side, and one number (below 10, e.g. 3, 7, 8 etc.) on the other side.

At the moment, the cards show K, -4, 7, P, R, 0, 5, and 2.

What are the cards you really need to turn over to determine whether or not it's true of all the cards on the table that if there is a vowel on one side, then there is an even number on the other side.

There is no trick. I'm just asking to have your opinion.

Take your...

Eight cards are on the table.]]>

Second, if you think it is not a paradox, please explain briefly why.

Finally, do you think it should be possible to prove there is in fact no paradox.

Thank you to stick to the...

The Liar's paradox]]>

Either way, why?

EB]]>

It is designed to help people understand modal logic and for some to stop the red herring of the so-called "

You can all vote, not just Sarkus.

Here is the argument:

Thank you to vote before posting any comment.

EB]]>

EB]]>

Thank you to vote before posting any comment on the argument (you can change your vote if need be).

Here is the logical argument:

For all we know, A may be the state of some unknown part of B;

C is determined by the state of some unknown part of B;

Therefore, for all we know, C may be determined by A

C is determined by the state of some unknown part of B;

Therefore, for all we know, C may be determined by A

Is the argument valid?

EB]]>

First example, dictionary definitions. Dictionary definitions are empirical evidence of how words are used and of what they mean.

So, to know what the word “empirical” means, we can look at the empirical evidence provided by a dictionary definition of what the word “empirical” means:

A king summons three of the wisest men known in his realm, and tells them he wants to test their wisdom.

He explains they will be led to a room in which they must sit in a circle facing inward.

He then tells the three that each of them will be blindfolded and a hat placed on their head.

Each hat can be only white or red. After removal of the blindfolds, the first of the three to say what color hat he is wearing will be ruled the wisest.

At this point the king...

The three wise men problem]]>

Thank you to vote before posting any comment on the argument (you can change your vote if need be).

Here is the logical argument:

For all we know, A may be the state of B;

What C does is determined by the state of B;

Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.

What C does is determined by the state of B;

Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.

Is the argument valid?

EB]]>

Formal structure of a logical argument]]>