XPost: sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/25/2025 9:58 PM, Python wrote:   
   > BTW you should think about what Ben Bacarisse once wrote:   
   >   
   > The set of all functions from ℕ to ℕ is uncountable (as large as the   
   > real numbers), while the set of all finite programs is only countable,   
   > so there are far more possible functions than there are programs to   
   > compute them; this guarantees that most functions are uncomputable and,   
   > more generally, that no finite formal system or algorithmic procedure   
   > can cover “all” functions, all truths, or all behaviors describable over   
   > the naturals—so whenever someone claims to have a universal decider, a   
   > complete semantic engine, or a single system that captures all “objects   
   > of thought,” they are implicitly pretending that countably many programs   
   > can represent uncountably many functions, which is mathematically   
   > impossible.   
   >   
   > The "halting problem" is actually only a way to confirm this with a   
   > specific case.   
   >   
   >   
      
   The entire body of atomic facts of the world   
   is a finite set that can be syntactically   
   formalized as Rudolf Carnap Meaning Postulates.   
      
   Every verbalized thought than anyone has ever   
   had or ever will have before the dying Sun   
   consumes the Earth is also a finite set.   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make   
   "true on the basis of meaning" computable.   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation   
   for correct reasoning.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)