XPost: comp.theory, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/9/2025 7:15 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >> On 12/7/2025 4:39 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>> olcott kirjoitti 6.12.2025 klo 14.24:   
   >>>> On 12/6/2025 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>> olcott kirjoitti 5.12.2025 klo 18.41:   
   >>>>>> On 12/5/2025 2:48 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>> olcott kirjoitti 3.12.2025 klo 17.59:   
   >>>>>>>> On 12/3/2025 4:41 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> olcott kirjoitti 2.12.2025 klo 16.00:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/1/2025 5:02 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that is the exxential difference between the two G's.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The expession F ⊬ G has a truth value because it is either   
   >>>>>>>>>>> true or false   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>>>> olcott kirjoitti 1.12.2025 klo 19.15:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>>> I propose that is a false assumption.   
   >   
   >  >>>>>>>>> On 12/2/2025 2:53 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>> If you want to propose anygthng like that you should   
   >>>>>>>>> (a) specify what is the assumption you want to propose as false   
   >>>>>>>>> (b) why should that assumption be considered false   
   >>>>>>>>> (c) what assumption would be true or at least less obviously false   
   >   
   > olcott kirjoitti 7.12.2025 klo 16.59:   
   >   
   >> (a) specify what is the assumption you want to propose as false   
   >   
   >> That Gödel 1931 Incompleteness exists as anything   
   >> besides a misconception.   
   >   
   > That does not make sense. Quite obviously Gödel's incompleteness is not   
   > mentioned in the scope where that can refer.   
   >   
      
   Actually I proved that every instance of pathological   
   self-reference involves an incoherent decision problem   
   instance. The only reason that you do not understand   
   that this proof is correct is your own lack of   
   sufficient understanding of unify_with_occurs_check().   
      
   >> I thought that when I proved that it is a misconception   
   >> that you would be able to infer the incorrect assumption   
   >> on the basis of this proof. Also if you could not infer   
   >> this then you lack the prerequisites to understand what   
   >> I am saying.   
   >   
   > If you don't understand how pronouns refer you should not use them.   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   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)