XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.lang   
   XPost: sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/4/2026 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 1/3/26 9:58 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 1/3/2026 8:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 1/3/26 9:44 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 1/3/2026 7:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>> On 1/3/26 7:14 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 1/3/2026 6:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 1/3/26 5:59 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 4:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> All deciders essentially: Transform finite string   
   >>>>>>>>>> inputs by finite string transformation rules into   
   >>>>>>>>>> {Accept, Reject} values.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Thus making   
   >>>>>>>>>> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"   
   >>>>>>>>>> inherently computable.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Nope.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> That is not a member of the body of knowledge.   
   >>>>>>>> My system only applies to the body of knowledge.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And thus is admittedly, not a logic system, which is about a body   
   >>>>>>> of truths derived from axioms and rules.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> In fact, you system can never learn anything new, as that wasn't   
   >>>>>>> part of that body, so isn't allowed.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So, all you are doing is admitting you have been on a wrong track   
   >>>>>>> for decades, you you were never actually looking at logic systems.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> We are probably already too late and the world   
   >>>>>> will be killed by climate change hired liars.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> My system could have prevented that but having   
   >>>>>> trollish fun carried more weight than preventing   
   >>>>>> the end of life an Earth.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Nope, your system of lies is what you say is causing the problem.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Your problem is you don't understand what truth actually is.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This is shown just by the fact that you beleive the LLMs you talk   
   >>>>> with.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Do you understand the correct semantic entailment   
   >>>> on the basis of expressions of language that are   
   >>>> stipulated to be true derives conclusions that are   
   >>>> necessarily true?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> YES you understand   
   >>>> or   
   >>>> NO you fail to understand   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Yes, but not ALL truths can be found that way,   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> I agree "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"   
   >> excludes "true on the basis of direct physical sensations"   
   >   
   > It also excludes true on the basis of logical reasoning.   
   >   
      
   Not when relations between finite strings directly   
   encode all of the underlying semantics and semantic   
   entailment is the only inference step allowed.   
      
   >>   
   >>> After all, how can the meaning of words solve the Goldbach conjecture?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> I also agree   
   >>   
   >> It is only the dirty trick of the Liar Paradox   
   >> that has kept True(L, x) from being defined for   
   >>   
   >> "the entire body of knowledge that can be expressed in language"   
   >>   
   >   
   > Which isn't what logic is about, and by necessity excludes anything new   
   > that can be learned.   
   >   
      
   "the entire body of knowledge that can be expressed in language"   
   at any moment in time defines a precise finite set of relations   
   between finite strings.   
      
   > And, it isn't just the Liar Paradox, but the possibility of the   
   > infinite, as Proof and Knowledge can't proceed from infinity, as we are   
   > fininte.   
   >   
      
   The result of infinite proofs is excluded from   
   "the entire body of knowledge that can be expressed in language"   
      
   > This means that your system can't handle Mathematics, or likely the   
   > rules that guide the universe.   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2026 Olcott

   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make 
   
   "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
   
   reliably computable.

   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation
   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)