Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 58,888 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Richard Damon    |
|    =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_readers_are_conned_into_    |
|    29 Dec 25 22:35:44    |
      XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math       From: polcott333@gmail.com              On 12/29/2025 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:       > On 12/29/25 6:28 PM, olcott wrote:       >> On 12/29/2025 5:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote:       >>> On 12/29/25 4:38 PM, olcott wrote:       >       >>>>       >>>> There exists a sequence of inference steps from       >>>> the axioms of a formal system that prove that       >>>> they themselves do not exist.       >>>       >>> Right, there is an INFININTE string of inference steps in the base       >>> theory that shows that no FINITE string of inference steps to show it.       >>>       >>       >> Rene Descartes said: "I think therefore I never existed".       >>       >> There is no sequence of inference steps that       >> prove they themselves do not exist.       >>       >> There is no sequence of inference steps that       >> prove they themselves do not exist.       >>       >> There is no sequence of inference steps that       >> prove they themselves do not exist.       >>       >> There is no sequence of inference steps that       >> prove they themselves do not exist.       >>       >> There is no sequence of inference steps that       >> prove they themselves do not exist.       >>       >> That is all that Gödel ever proved.       >> That is all that Gödel ever proved.       >> That is all that Gödel ever proved.       >> That is all that Gödel ever proved.       >> That is all that Gödel ever proved.       >>       >>       >       > In other words, you are just showing that you don't know what you are       > talking about and thus going into non-sense,       >              ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition       which asserts its own unprovability. 15 … (Gödel 1931:40-41)              Correctly paraphrased as:       a sequence of inference steps from axioms       that assert that they themselves do not exist.              Gödel, Kurt 1931.       On Formally Undecidable Propositions of       Principia Mathematica And Related Systems              > As I said, and you were too stupid to understand, there is a finite       > sequence of steps in the META systen that show that there is an INFINITE       > sequence of steps in the system that show there is not a FINITE sequence       > of steps in the system to prove it.       >       > It seems to you, infinity is finite, and thus your mind is just ZERO.       >       > Of course, you never let facts get in the way of your stupidity.       >                     --       Copyright 2025 Olcott |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca