Talk:Uniqueness quantification
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Uniquity or Uniquitive? Either of these terms a better choice than Uniqueness? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.207.133.114 (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Uniqueness irrespective of existence
[edit source]"Existence/expressibility must be proven before uniqueness" — Really? No; uniqueness means "at most one such object" and is well-defined separately from existence that means "at least one such object". It is legitimate to prove uniqueness assuming the existence of those two quantities to begin with; indeed, if existence fails then uniqueness cannot be violated, anyway! And we mathematicians do so routinely. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
-- No, you are incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.21.239 (talk) 22:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Of course you are correct, Boris. I noticed this as well and rewrote the example so that it no longer states this (among other changes). —Toby Bartels (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
negation
[edit source]should add negation of unique existential quantification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.149.51.165 (talk) 21:28, 31 January 2019 (UTC)