XPost: sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: 643-408-1753@kylheku.com   
      
   On 2025-11-26, Python  wrote:   
   > Le 26/11/2025 à 04:24, olcott a écrit :   
   >> When ALL *objects of thought* are defined   
   >> in terms of other *objects of thought* then   
   >> their truth and their proof is simply walking   
   >> the knowledge tree.   
   >   
   > A definition tree is not a proof system, Peter.   
   > Walking a hierarchy does not make undecidable truths disappear — it just   
   > hides them from your model.   
   >   
   > If “truth” were just “following links in a tree,” then:   
   >   
   > no arithmetic fact would require a proof,   
      
   And, like, that would totally not suit Olcott just fine, right?   
      
   > no theorem would be non-trivial,   
      
   No crank could be stupid for misunderstanding a theorem.   
      
   > no undecidable sentence would exist,   
      
   So even a crank could finally walk into a restaurant and decide between   
   a soup and salad in 15 seconds flat.   
      
   > and mathematics would collapse into a directory structure.   
      
   Preferrably on a MS-DOS C:\> drive, to suit Olcott.   
      
   It all checks out.   
      
   --   
   TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr   
   Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal   
   Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)