User:IssaRice/Adverb negative adjective: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* "[[wikipedia:Recursively inseparable sets|recursively inseparable]]" to mean "''not'' recursively separable" (equivalently, "''not'' separable by a recursive set") -- this sounds like there is some recursive/computable process that "inseparates" the two sets, which makes no sense | * "[[wikipedia:Recursively inseparable sets|recursively inseparable]]" to mean "''not'' recursively separable" (equivalently, "''not'' separable by a recursive set") -- this sounds like there is some recursive/computable process that "inseparates" the two sets, which makes no sense | ||
* "negation incomplete" to mean "''not'' negation-complete" (see Peter Smith's Godel book) | * "negation incomplete" to mean "''not'' negation-complete" (see Peter Smith's Godel book) | ||
This one is slightly different: | |||
* "non-recursive enumerability" to mean "not (recursively enumerable)" -- see Cutland p. 130. | |||
Revision as of 23:59, 1 January 2019
Sometimes the pattern adverb followed by (negative adjective) is used in mathematical terms to mean negative followed by (adverb adjective), and I find this confusing. Here are two examples:
- "absolutely divergent" to mean "not absolutely convergent" see this comment by Terence Tao. -- this sounds like the series does the diverging thing in an absolute manner, which makes no sense.
- "recursively inseparable" to mean "not recursively separable" (equivalently, "not separable by a recursive set") -- this sounds like there is some recursive/computable process that "inseparates" the two sets, which makes no sense
- "negation incomplete" to mean "not negation-complete" (see Peter Smith's Godel book)
This one is slightly different:
- "non-recursive enumerability" to mean "not (recursively enumerable)" -- see Cutland p. 130.