Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is Leibnizian calculus embeddable in first order logic?Piotr Błaszczyk, Vladimir Kanovei, Karin U. Katz, Mikhail G. Katz, Taras Kudryk, Thomas Mormann & David Sherry - 2017 - Foundations of Science 22 (4):73 - 88.
    To explore the extent of embeddability of Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus in first-order logic (FOL) and modern frameworks, we propose to set aside ontological issues and focus on pro- cedural questions. This would enable an account of Leibnizian procedures in a framework limited to FOL with a small number of additional ingredients such as the relation of infinite proximity. If, as we argue here, first order logic is indeed suitable for developing modern proxies for the inferential moves found in Leibnizian infinitesimal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Mathematical Intelligencer Flunks the Olympics.Alexander E. Gutman, Mikhail G. Katz, Taras S. Kudryk & Semen S. Kutateladze - 2017 - Foundations of Science 22 (3):539-555.
    The Mathematical Intelligencer recently published a note by Y. Sergeyev that challenges both mathematics and intelligence. We examine Sergeyev’s claims concerning his purported Infinity computer. We compare his grossone system with the classical Levi-Civita fields and with the hyperreal framework of A. Robinson, and analyze the related algorithmic issues inevitably arising in any genuine computer implementation. We show that Sergeyev’s grossone system is unnecessary and vague, and that whatever consistent subsystem could be salvaged is subsumed entirely within a stronger and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Leibniz versus Ishiguro: Closing a Quarter Century of Syncategoremania.Tiziana Bascelli, Piotr Błaszczyk, Vladimir Kanovei, Karin U. Katz, Mikhail G. Katz, David M. Schaps & David Sherry - 2016 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 6 (1):117-147.
    Did Leibniz exploit infinitesimals and infinities à la rigueur or only as shorthand for quantified propositions that refer to ordinary Archimedean magnitudes? Hidé Ishiguro defends the latter position, which she reformulates in terms of Russellian logical fictions. Ishiguro does not explain how to reconcile this interpretation with Leibniz’s repeated assertions that infinitesimals violate the Archimedean property (i.e., Euclid’s Elements, V.4). We present textual evidence from Leibniz, as well as historical evidence from the early decades of the calculus, to undermine Ishiguro’s (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations