Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with higher-order-logics
Search options not deleted
user 142409
For logics which admit quantification over sets/relations/functions/etc. rather than merely over individuals. The most common example is second-order logic.
4
votes
Accepted
Are there quantifiers that require multiple "steps" to define?
The quantifier $\exists^\infty$ is not definable over $\mathcal{L}_0$.
To prove it, we show that a sentence $S$ tautologised by $\exists^\infty$ is also a tautology for the "always false" quantifier $ …
- 116