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 262,231 of 262,912   
   Tristan Wibberley to Richard Damon   
   Re: have we been misusing incompleteness   
   29 Dec 25 20:36:21   
   
   XPost: comp.theory   
   From: tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk   
      
   On 29/12/2025 19:51, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/29/25 2:21 PM, Pierre Asselin wrote:   
   >> In sci.logic Tristan Wibberley   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>> On 29/12/2025 13:37, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> Incompleteness is a property of a given Formal System, it says that   
   >>>> there exist a statement that is true in that system, but can not be   
   >>>> proven in that system.   
   >>   
   >>> What do you mean by "proven" here. Do you mean "derived" ?   
   >>   
   >> I think Richard misspoke slightly. The undecidable statement is   
   >> true *in the intended interpretation* of the formal system   
   >> (In Goedel's case, the natural numbers with addition and multiplication).   
   >>   
   >> Truth "in the formal system" isn't really defined. You need an   
   >> interpretation.   
   >>   
   >   
   > No, statements in a formal system are DEFINED to be true   
      
   Best to keep pushing the lingufranca toward "to be theorems".   
      
   ps, I note that the use of "defined to be" here is technically wrong but   
   the use of "true" is so much more problematic.   
      
   > if that> statement, referencing object defined in the system model,   
   and related   
   > by relationships defined in the system  can be established starting with   
   > the initial "facts" (axioms) of the system, and following the allowed   
   > logical operations of the system.   
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
     ||||||||||||||||||   
     ``````````````````~~~<~~~<~~~< Deduction Rules   
      
      
     A statement in a formal system is included among its theorems exactly   
   when it is derivable from the axioms of the system--which are those of   
   its theorems that are merely supposed--and the derivation is done by the   
   deduction rules of the system.   
      
   We must prepare ourselves mentally for mathematicians to say "in a   
   system" when they mean "in some axiom extension of a system" and to say   
   "is true" when they mean "has a derivable embedding in at least one   
   episystem embedding the system".   
      
   --   
   Tristan Wibberley   
      
   The message body is Copyright (C) 2025 Tristan Wibberley except   
   citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,   
   of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it   
   verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to   
   promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation   
   of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general   
   superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train   
   any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that   
   will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

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


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca