Logic Notebook 1867-1880

ReadAboutContentsVersionsHelp
1

1

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

0

0

Nov 11

Then my first developement formula will be

[Dr?]

where, however C may [Dr?] alpha. C will infact itself be of the same form. So that the formula should be written

[Dr?]

How I reserve this important matter for the future study. I ought somehow to get from it something answering to [Dr?] theorem.

Thus [Dr?] [Dr?]

Here are only two equations for the determination of three unknown quantities. But returning to Qx I can first separate his into a series of terms for

Last edit 3 months ago by Jannyp
2

2

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

3

3

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

4

4

Nov. 12

E is a non relative term Ex is to be regarded as signifying the C's among all the x's

[...]

perhaps rather if the x's exist.

I will now note all the exceptions, in reference to these exponents.

In arithmetic [...] now in logic no sense has been attached to (E^x)^4 which is of course different from E^x^4 Therefore this signification may be gone [...] If [...] but [...] is indeterminate for it may be that [...]

Hence we might write [...]

Last edit 5 months ago by ap2zj
Records 1 – 5 of 20