Re: Within Proof Theoretic Semantics Gödel's G h as no meaning in PA

On 04/07/2026 16:31, Tristan Wibberley wrote:
> On 06/05/2026 20:37, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

>> ... as explained and re-explained ad nauseam around here:
>> just the resident trolls won't get it.
>>
>> Cantor's diagonal argument, the one with the binary sequences,
>> is indeed constructive: a definition of anti-diagonal of *any*
>> (infinite) list is provided, and the proof that the anti-diagonal
>> cannot be in the list is quite constructive.

Not a troll, just not keeping thoughts on track and not picking up on
distinctions between some things with similar names.

I now recognise I was continuing to talk about the argument for the
uncountability of reals instead of the one for the uncountability of
independent choices of unending sequences of symbols from a finite
repertoire including those made entirely of independent free choices
from that repertoire.

A new unending sequence of symbols from a finite repertoire is still not
constructed for each purported such object because those made entirely
of independent free choices of symbols aren't constructed so no
constructive operation constructs anything from them.

-- 
Tristan Wibberley

The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.