> [Pat Hayes:] > >This is not quite right. Whoops, you are correct. I shouldn't stay up so late answering emails. The skolem form I gave would have been appropriate for (forall (?a ?c) (exists (?b)( <=> (grandparent ?a ?c) (and (parent ?a ?b)(parent ?b ?c)) )) ) which isnt quite so plausible, though is in fact still correct. In this case, the skolem term (f ?a ?c) is an intermediate parent/child if ?a is ?c's grandparent, and otherwise it is just some random thing which makes one of the (parent ...) assertions false. Either way, the biconditional comes out true. Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayesReceived on Monday, 19 March 2001 18:08:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:34:45 GMT