Return to Answer

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true. You should accept the Law of Non-Contradiction, because it's always true, and never false.

If a contradiction denotes a true proposition, then you can prove every proposition is true.

Let a be a specific statement, and let B be an arbitrary statement. The following reasoning event demonstrates how the statement 'a and not a' implies B.

Definition. if A then B = not A or B

1. a and not a [open scope of assumption]
2. (a and not a) or B [1; law of addiction]
3. B or (a and not a) [2; commutativity of conjunction]
4. not(not B) or (a and not a) [3; double negation]
5. If not B then (a and not a) [4; def.]
6. not(not B) [5; reductio ad absurdum]
7. B [6; double negation]
8. If a and not a then B [close scope of assumption]

As you can see, this natural deduction demonstrates how to derive ex falso quodlibet. What this says is, if even one contradiction denotes a true proposition, then by modus ponens B denotes a true proposition. Since B is an arbitrary statement, that means any statement you say denotes a true proposition. As Jo said, that makes your logic worthless. As Kaia said, that means 0 = 1.

Now to my point. By understanding temporal logic, and the notion of simultaneity, you know 0 ≠ 1.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true. You should accept the Law of Non-Contradiction, because it's always true, and never false.

If a contradiction denotes a true proposition, then you can prove every proposition is true.

Let a be a specific statement, and let B be an arbitrary statement. The following reasoning event proves " if 'a and not a' then B."

Definition. if A then B = not A or B

1. a and not a [open scope of assumption]
2. (a and not a) or B [1; law of addiction]
3. B or (a and not a) [2; commutativity of conjunction]
4. not(not B) or (a and not a) [3; double negation]
5. If not B then (a and not a) [4; def.]
6. not(not B) [5; reductio ad absurdum]
7. B [6; double negation]
8. If a and not a then B [close scope of assumption]

As you can see, this natural deduction demonstrates how to prove ex falso quodlibet. What this says is, if even one contradiction denotes a true proposition, then by modus ponens B denotes a true proposition. Since B is an arbitrary statement, that means any statement you say denotes a true proposition. As Jo said, that makes your logic worthless. As Kaia said, that means 0 = 1.

Now to my point. By understanding temporal logic, and the notion of simultaneity, you know 0 ≠ 1.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true. You should accept the Law of Non-Contradiction, because it's always true, and never false.

If a contradiction denotes a true proposition, then you can prove every proposition is true.

Let a be a specific statement, and let B be an arbitrary statement. The following reasoning event demonstrates how the statement 'a and not a' implies B.

Definition. if A then B = not A or B

1. a and not a [open scope of assumption]
2. (a and not a) or B [1; law of addiction]
3. B or (a and not a) [2; commutativity of conjunction]
4. not(not B) or (a and not a) [3; double negation]
5. If not B then (a and not a) [4; def.]
6. not(not B) [5; reductio ad absurdum]
7. B [6; double negation]
8. If a and not a then B [close scope of assumption]

As you can see, this natural deduction demonstrates how to derive ex falso quodlibet. What this says is, if even one contradiction denotes a true proposition, then by modus ponens B. Since B is an arbitrary statement, that means any statement you say denotes a true proposition. As Jo said, that makes your logic worthless. As Kaia said, that means 0 = 1.

Now to my point. By understanding temporal logic, and the notion of simultaneity, you know 0 ≠ 1.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true. You should accept the Law of Non-Contradiction, because it's always true, and never false.

If a contradiction denotes a true proposition, then you can prove every proposition is true.

Let a be a specific statement, and let B be an arbitrary statement. The following reasoning event demonstrates how the statement 'a and not a' implies B.

Definition. if A then B = not A or B

1. a and not a [open scope of assumption]
2. (a and not a) or B [1; law of addiction]
3. B or (a and not a) [2; commutativity of conjunction]
4. not(not B) or (a and not a) [3; double negation]
5. If not B then (a and not a) [4; def.]
6. not(not B) [5; reductio ad absurdum]
7. B [6; double negation]
8. If a and not a then B [close scope of assumption]

As you can see, this natural deduction demonstrates how to derive ex falso quodlibet. What this says is, if even one contradiction denotes a true proposition, then by modus ponens B denotes a true proposition. Since B is an arbitrary statement, that means any statement you say denotes a true proposition. As Jo said, that makes your logic worthless. As Kaia said, that means 0 = 1.

Now to my point. By understanding temporal logic, and the notion of simultaneity, you know 0 ≠ 1.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.

Consider the English statement, A = "My eyes are closed." It denotes/symbolizes/represents/names some single proposition, out of the infinity of propositions. Now, some propositions have a truth value that is constant in time, and all others have a truth value that varies in time. "My eyes are closed" denotes a proposition whose truth value varies in time. The key observation is that the proposition it denotes cannot be true and false simultaneously. Symbolically we can express this observation by writing 0 ≠ 1. This leads directly to the Law of Non-Contradiction. A simple truth table reveals this.

Row 1 is the statement row. Rows 2 and 3 are state rows. Each state row of the table corresponds to reality at a single moment in time, i.e at a particular state of the universe (0 and 1 denote the truth values false and true, respectively). So columns 1 and 2 taken together show that there is no moment in time for which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false. The logical operator 'and' is the simultaneity operator of binary logic. So column 3 all by itself shows there is no moment in time or state, at which the proposition denoted by A is simultaneously true and false.

The statement in column 4 is the Law Of Non-Contradiction. As you can see, there are no moments in time at which the proposition it denotes is false. That proposition is always true. You should accept the Law of Non-Contradiction, because it's always true, and never false.

If a contradiction denotes a true proposition, then you can prove every proposition is true.

Let a be a specific statement, and let B be an arbitrary statement. The following reasoning event demonstrates how the statement 'a and not a' implies B.

Definition. if A then B = not A or B

1. a and not a [open scope of assumption]
2. (a and not a) or B [1; law of addiction]
3. B or (a and not a) [2; commutativity of conjunction]
4. not(not B) or (a and not a) [3; double negation]
5. If not B then (a and not a) [4; def.]
6. not(not B) [5; reductio ad absurdum]
7. B [6; double negation]
8. If a and not a then B [close scope of assumption]

As you can see, this natural deduction demonstrates how to derive ex falso quodlibet. What this says is, if even one contradiction denotes a true proposition, then by modus ponens B. Since B is an arbitrary statement, that means any statement you say denotes a true proposition. As Jo said, that makes your logic worthless. As Kaia said, that means 0 = 1.

Now to my point. By understanding temporal logic, and the notion of simultaneity, you know 0 ≠ 1.

I don't consider temporal binary logic intuitive. Nonetheless, it's not complicated. Don't feel obligated to take my word as law, Einstein had misgivings about the concept of simultaneity.