Re: Terms-Of-The-Art are Liars

On 7/5/2026 7:19 AM, dbush wrote:
> On 7/4/2026 5:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/4/2026 12:11 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2026 1:07 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The English word "incomplete" establishes the base
>>>> meaning (parent node) in the knowledge ontology.
>>>>
>>>> I will not tolerate deceptive terms-of-the-art.
>>>
>>> In other words, you intend to lie by misusing definitions.
>>>
>> Math undecidable: The inability to translate
>> incoherent nonsense into a truth value.
> 
> False.
> 
> In computability theory and computational complexity theory, an 
> undecidable problem is a decision problem for which it is proved to be 
> impossible to construct an algorithm that always leads to a correct yes- 
> or-no answer.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problem
> 
>> LP := ~True(LP)
>>   G := ~Provable(PA, G)
> 
> The above are not examples of that.
> 
>>
>> Math Incomplete: The inability to accomplish
>> more than a system was defined to accomplish.
> 
> False.  Intent does not factor into formal systems.
> 
> In mathematical logic, a theory is complete if it is consistent and for 
> every closed formula in the theory's language, either that formula or 
> its negation is provable
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_theory
> 
>> (∀x, S(x) ≠ x) cannot be proven in Q
>>
>> Math mapping from an input to an output:
>> Ignore the input and output a fixed constant.
> 
> Provide an external reference that 1) defines "ignoring the input" and 
> 2) forbids it.
> 
>> int mapping_function(int x)
>> {
>>    return 0;
>> }
>>
>>
> 
> 
> All you're proving is that you can't understand that words can have 
> different meanings in different contexts that aren't necessarily related.
> 


A program that might halt sometimes, and not halt other times. Say it 
was based on a TRNG.