XPost: sci.logic, sci.lang, alt.philosophy   
   XPost: comp.theory   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/4/2026 2:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 1/4/26 3:25 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 1/4/2026 1:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 1/4/26 12:59 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 1/4/2026 6:41 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>> On 1/3/26 10:56 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 1/3/2026 9:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 1/3/26 9:53 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 8:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 9:42 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 8:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 8:48 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 7:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 7:09 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 5:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 4:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 3:36 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 1:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 10:32 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/2026 8:09 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/3/26 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/2026 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/26 8:30 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/2026 5:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/26 6:10 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/2026 3:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/2/26 4:24 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2018 11:56 AM, Pete Olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/17/2018 12:42 AM, Pete Olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a Collection is defined one or more things   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that have one or more properties in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> common. These operations from set theory   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are available: {⊆, ∈}   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An BaseFact is an expression X of (natural   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or formal) language L that has been   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assigned the semantic property of True.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Similar to a math Axiom).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A Collection T of BaseFacts of language L   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forms the ultimate foundation of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notion of Truth in language L.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To verify that an expression X of language   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L is True or False only requires a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> syntactic logical consequence inference   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chain (formal proof) from one or more   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elements of T to X or ~X.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True(L, X) ↔ ∃Γ ⊆ BaseFact(L)   
   Provable(Γ, X)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> False(L, X) ↔ ∃Γ ⊆ BaseFact(L)   
   Provable(Γ,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~X)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2018 (and many other years since   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1997) Pete Olcott   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Truth is the set of interlocking concepts   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that can be formalized symbolically.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All of formalized Truth is only about   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relations between finite strings of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characters.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This exact same Truth can be equally   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expressed (tokenized) as relations between   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> integers.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2026 update   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is entirely expressed as relations between   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite strings   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of characters.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This by itself makes   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reliably computable.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, not until you can do the first, which you   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't unless you make you system "small".   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All you are doing it proving you don't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand what you are talking about.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is exactly what someone would say that   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand what I am talking about.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU don't know what you are talking about,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I coined the term ignorance squared back in 1998.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One cannot discern one's own ignorance because   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this requires the missing knowledge to see the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you are just ignorance cubed.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is the same idea in much greater depth   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Formalism_(philosophy_of_mathematics)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, and Hilbert was proven WRONG, and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admitted it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It sure would seem that way to everyone that did   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not devote half their life to finding complete   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clarity.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, he was proven WRONG, and he admitted it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He may have admitted it but he was not actually   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been proven wrong.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure he was.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)