Editor, Editors, USER, editor, translator
5,845
edits
Changes
The logic of classical language/fr (view source)
Revision as of 16:54, 2 November 2021
, 3 years agoCreated page with "signifie que tous les patients qui sont positifs au CT de l'ATM ont des DTM, mais que même si Mary Poppins est positive au CT de l'ATM, elle n'a pas de DTM."
<math>\{a \not\in x \mid \forall \text{x} \; A(\text{x}) \rightarrow {B}(\text{x}) \and A( a)\rightarrow \urcorner B(a) \}</math>. <math>(3)</math>
<math>\{a \not\in x \mid \forall \text{x} \; A(\text{x}) \rightarrow {B}(\text{x}) \and A( a)\rightarrow \urcorner B(a) \}</math>. <math>(3)</math>
"<math>(3)</math>" means that every patient who is TMJ CT positive has TMDs but even though Mary Poppins is TMJ CT positive, she does not have TMDs.
"<math>(3)</math>" signifie que tous les patients qui sont positifs au CT de l'ATM ont des DTM, mais que même si Mary Poppins est positive au CT de l'ATM, elle n'a pas de DTM..
In order to prove that this proposition is true, we must use once again the above mentioned <u>demonstration by absurdity</u>. If its denial creates a contradiction, surely the neurologist's proposition will be true:
In order to prove that this proposition is true, we must use once again the above mentioned <u>demonstration by absurdity</u>. If its denial creates a contradiction, surely the neurologist's proposition will be true: