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 mereology
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 508667
Atomic Mereology, Gunk Mereology, Mereology with Bottom, General Extensional Mereology, Mereology and Set Theory, Mereotopology, Boundaries, Grounding point free Geometry, Lewis's Mereology, philosophy of Mereology
3
votes
Accepted
Can this kind of Mereology be synonymous with Set Theory?
If, for every atom $a$, $a \subseteq x$ implies $a \subseteq y$, then $x \subseteq y$. Assume $x \nsubseteq y$, then by Supplementation, there is a $z \subseteq x$ such that $\neg z \ O \ y$. By Atomi …
- 1,851