home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.logic      Logic -- math, philosophy & computationa      262,912 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 262,096 of 262,912   
   olcott to Richard Damon   
   Re: Carol's question + my Prolog are a c   
   22 Dec 25 11:59:52   
   
   XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.prolog, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/22/2025 11:41 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/22/25 12:30 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/22/2025 11:23 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 12/22/25 12:19 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/22/2025 11:11 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>> On 22/12/2025 18:39, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> % This sentence is not true.   
   >>>>>>   ?- LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>>>>> LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The Prolog implementation's opinion is that it is true.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> % This sentence is not true.   
   >>>>   ?- LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>>> LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>>> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).   
   >>>> false.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> By erasing the last line you seem to be dishonest   
   >>>> was that your intention?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Also you do not seem to understand exactly   
   >>>> what unify_with_occurs_check() means even   
   >>>> when I quoted Clocksin & Mellish on this.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> It means that the input sentence didn't obey Prologs non-recursvie   
   >>> nature.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> No that is not what it means.   
   >> It means that the evaluation of LP is stuck   
   >> in infinite recursion. LLMs are smart enough   
   >> to immediately see this.   
   >   
   > BECAUSE Prolog, and the simplistic logic it uses, can't handle that   
   > statement.   
      
   Counter-factual.   
      
   Prolog (and Olcott's Minimal Type Theory) detects   
   cycles in the directed graph of the evaluation   
   sequence of an expression.   
      
      
   > Prolog can't handle LP = not(not(true(LP)))   
   > which isn't a contradiction either.   
   >   
   > I suspect it can't handle   
   >   
   > LP := true(LP) or (X or not(x))   
   >   
   > either, unless your version parallel searches both sides.   
   >   
   >   
      
   The Truth-teller also fails to be semantically   
   grounded thus specifies infinite recursion.   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 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)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca