It was put forward that it is possible to apprehend a set such as
{[Event/Idea/Object],[Event/Idea/Object]}
while a set such as the following is not apprehensible
{{}}
It seems there is an illogical flaw in the suggestion. May I ask if you are aware of this theory's name? I would like to see if the flaw has been acknowledged
That's complete nonsense. There's no way to tell if there's a fallacy because the statement is incomprehensible.
What does "apprehend" mean?
What's a "set"? A mathematical set?
What does this mean? "{[Event/Idea/Object],[Event/Idea/Object]}" What are you trying to represent?
What does this mean? "{{}}"
it is all right. My written definition may be of familiarity to somebody however, as the theory I was shown uses "{{}}" and a set with an apprehensible idea.
I'm loath to create another post for this matter which I have been intending to ask. Do you know any playthings/objects akin to the
gyroscope, pendulum clock, drinking bird or balancing bird
which efficiently harnesses simple physics to achieve astounding actions? I hope to purchase such a plaything/object as a gift.