No anything

the continuation of the logic (there is not) the same name of the article. In this sense: (there is something) = (something ≠ something). Here's the code in python:

/ > the

#!/usr/bin/python
# logic: no x = (x not-equal x)
# is x = (x is x)
A = ('a', 'b', 'c')
B = ('c', 'd')
C = ('d', 'e')
D = ()
#
#set intersect if (there is OR there are) inSet1 == inSet2
#sets do not intersect if not (exist OR exist)
def intersection_of_sets(set1, set2):
pm = False
for inSet1 in set1:
for inSet2 in set2:
if inSet1 == inSet2: 
#print('set intersect: ', inSet1, '=', inSet2)
pm = True
#else: print('sets do not intersect, i.e., have an empty set')
if pm == True: print('set intersect')
else: print('set intersect')
return pm
#
intersection_of_sets(A, B) #returns True: sets intersect
intersection_of_sets(A, C) #returns False: the intersection of the sets is empty
#i.e. each element of the  set  And not equal 
#each element of the set With
intersection_of_sets(D, D) #returns False: the empty set is set 
#identically false formula, i.e. a contradiction
#ie there is no such element x that x=x

And below is a link to the theory. Quote from a textbook [N. Nepeivoda, Applied logic, page 71], in which the empty set is defined identically false formula.



In conclusion, different combinations of these, there are not allow to construct the natural numbers.

PS System, the adoption of which can neither be proved nor disproved by means of the theory is called incomplete. On the contrary, the system is called complete if it is proved either F, or prove its negation. And since the identically false formula excluded from evidence, and Express what they describe is not possible. ... So, in the classical view, come to conclusions about the inevitability unprovable in a consistent system.

Article based on information from habrahabr.ru