[TYPES] question (cont.)

Vladimir Voevodsky vladimir at ias.edu
Thu Jul 19 11:16:38 EDT 2012


> Don't you have False (as 0=1 for instance) hence not A (as 
> A ->False) hence exA (as forall notA -> False), hence everything?

Thanks to everybody who pointed this out to me. I'll have to think whether my question has a more sensible reformulation.

Vladimir.




More information about the Types-list mailing list