XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   XPost: sci.lang   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/14/2026 9:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 1/14/26 5:11 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 1/14/2026 3:36 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>> Interpreting incompleteness as a gap between mathematical truth and   
   >>> proof depends on truth-conditional semantics; once this is replaced   
   >>> by proof-theoretic semantics a framework not yet sufficiently   
   >>> developed at the time of Gödel’s proof the notion of such a gap   
   >>> becomes unfounded.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Gödel and Turing incompleteness results expose the limits of   
   >> denotational and truth-conditional semantics, not limits of proof or   
   >> computation per se. When meaning is grounded operationally or proof-   
   >> theoretically, the problematic self-referential constructions are   
   >> rejected as semantically unfounded rather than treated as determinate   
   >> but unknowable facts.   
   >>   
   >   
   > The problem is that "Computation" relys on truth-conditional semantics,   
   > as the behavior of a program *IS* what it actually does, not what you   
   > can generically prove about it.   
   >   
      
   Proof in terms of the behavior of DD simulated by HHH.   
      
   > I guess you are giving up on your idea of making "Truth Compuational",   
   > as by your logic you can't imbue meaning to things, and thus you can't   
   > actually write even a proof checker for a system, let alone a truth   
   > checker.   
      
      
   --   
   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)