Re: Terms-Of-The-Art are Liars
Mikko <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | sci.logic,sci.math,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,alt.philosophy |
|---|---|
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 05/07/2026 19:29, olcott wrote: > On 7/5/2026 9:19 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 > > Wittgenstein (1937) > 'True in Russell's system' means, as was said: > proved in Russell's system; and 'false in Russell's > system' means: the opposite has been proved > in Russell's system At the time the difference between "true" and "provable" was not yet understood to the extent it is now. That sentence can now be rejected as a violation of the current rules of the language game. Perhaps you don't understand what that means but Wittgenstein would if he still were alive. -- Mikko