XPost: comp.theory, sci.math
From: polcott333@gmail.com
On 12/1/2025 4:31 AM, Mikko wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie kirjoitti 29.11.2025 klo 13.55:
>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>
>> In comp.theory olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/28/2025 4:54 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>
>>>> In comp.theory olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 11/28/2025 3:08 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>> dart200 wrote:
>>
>> [ .... ]
>>
>>>>> *Within A new foundation for correct reasoning*
>>
>>>>> (a) Every element of the body of knowledge that can
>>>>> be expressed in language is entirely composed of
>>>>> (1) A finite set of atomic facts
>>>>> (2) Every expression of language that is semantically
>>>>> entailed by (1)
>>>>> (b) a formal language based on Rudolf Carnap Meaning
>>>>> Postulates combined with The Kurt Gödel definition
>>>>> of the "theory of simple types"
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>>>>> History_of_type_theory#G%C3%B6del_1944
>>>>> Where every semantic meaning is fully encoded syntactically
>>>>> as one fully integrated whole not needing model theory
>>
>>>>> We have now totally overcome Gödel Incompleteness
>>>>> and Tarski Undefinability for the entire body if
>>>>> knowledge that can be expressed in language. It
>>>>> is now a giant semantic tautology.
>>
>>>> You can't "overcome" these theorems, since they're not obstacles.
>>>> They're fundamental truths.
>>
>>> I just showed the detailed steps making both of
>>> them impossible in the system that I just specified.
>>> A counter-example is categorically impossible.
>>
>> Your construction is impossible, as proven by Gödel's Incompleteness
>> Theorem.
>
> Doesn't a theory that has no theorems satisfy all above stated
> requriements?
>
Every element of the body of knowledge
is not such a formal system.
--
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)
|
