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 262,326 of 262,912   
   olcott to Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn   
   Re: Key difference between math and the    
   02 Jan 26 17:20:54   
   
   XPost: sci.math, comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/2/2026 4:40 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:   
   > Richard Damon wrote:   
   >> On 1/2/26 11:08 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>> The philosophy of math says maybe we have   
   >>> been thinking about this stuff all wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> Math says of course we haven't been thinking   
   >>> about this stuff all wrong everyone knows   
   >>> that math is infallible.   
   >>   
   >> Can you show where math *IS* fallible?   
   >   
   > Do not feed the troll.  Their entire premise is pseudoscientific nonsense.   
   >   
   > _A person_ can be fallible or infallible (actually, no person is infallible,   
   > i.e. such that they cannot err; there are just certain people who *claim*   
   > that they are), not an entire *science* like mathematics or any other field   
   > of inquiry.   
   >   
   > In particular, mathematics determines which statements are *true* and which   
   > are *false* *given certain axioms*.  That does not mean that those things   
   > have to *exist* in nature (not even conceptually), which is the main   
   > difference between mathematics and a natural science like physics.   
   >   
      
   Incoherence proves the foundation errors of math.   
   Math can be reframed to become as expressive as   
   natural language while eliminating undecidability   
   and incompleteness.   
      
   > The problem is that those people who reason about science using armchair   
   > philosophy only will never understand that their approach does not work,   
   > cannot lead to any actual knowledge, because they have *literally* never   
   > "done the math", and never understood that abstract concepts in the natural   
   > sciences are merely *a tool* for the *description* of reality.   
   >   
   > See also:   
   >   
   > The Feynman Messenger Lectures (1964/1965): The Character of Physical Law.   
   > 2. The Relation of Mathematics and Physics.  Cornell University/BBC.   
   >    
   >   
   > F'up2 sci.math   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2026 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-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