[FOM] Seeking sage advice on terminology
frode.bjordal at ifikk.uio.no
Sat Aug 3 06:39:19 EDT 2013
I now write *thesis* for theses of the system and *theorem* for results
about the system.
Professor Dr. Frode Bjørdal
Universitetet i Oslo Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
quicumque vult hinc potest accedere ad paginam virtualem
2013/8/1 Nik Weaver <nweaver at math.wustl.edu>
> I'm writing a book on forcing right now and have a similar issue.
> The terminological distinction I am using is "theorem" versus
> "metatheorem". Once that terminology is set up I don't find it
> necessary to use different terms for proof of theorems and proofs
> of metatheorems.
> If saying "FLT is a theorem (of PA)" and "PA |- FLT is a metatheorem
> (of your metatheory)" doesn't solve your problem, perhaps you could
> use the term "metaproof" for a proof in the metatheory.
> When I write about proofs of FLT I always have trouble finding a graceful
>> terminology to distinguish proving FLT in PA versus proving in proof
>> that PA |- FLT.
>> I don't mean the conceptual distinction is difficult. I mean I'd like
>> a cleaner terminology for it so i don't keep using "proof" to mean two
>> different things. Maybe the literature I have been reading does have
>> a solution but if so I have not absorbed it.
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the FOM