[FOM] From EFQ to Research 3--reply to Harvey Friedman

[Tennant, Neil]

in http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2015-September/019110.html , 'From EFQ to Research 3',
Harvey Friedman has asked yet again

"1. What can we prove about the Tennant turnstile? ... Very limited partial results only are available at present."

This is a surprising assessment. I thought I gave a whole slew of results---not just the one Harvey then mentioned, about the turnstile in Classical Core Logic being complete for truth-table consequence.

"2. What is being offered for first order predicate calculus? I have
not seen the Tennant turnstile in action on the FOM with quantifiers."

What exactly is Harvey expecting me to provide here? I've given a detailed statement of the rules for the quantifiers. Do I need to demonstrate them in use with little examples? The rules are stated also in published items that I have referred to earlier.

In Harvey's repeated questions 3-10 inclusive (on this last iteration), I see no evidence that he has absorbed any of the details that I offered in response to them in my posting
'From EFQ to Research 2--reply to Harvey Friedman'
http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2015-September/019108.html

I'm willing to believe that there might have been an inadvertent cut-and-paste from the wrong draft into the body of Harvey's last email. So this reply ends here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/fom/attachments/20150911/9d3614e5/attachment-0001.html>