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 262,746 of 262,912    |
|    Tristan Wibberley to Richard Damon    |
|    =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_G=C3=B6del=27s_G_has_nev    |
|    28 Jan 26 16:21:42    |
      XPost: sci.math       From: tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk              On 20/01/2026 05:29, Richard Damon wrote:       > On 1/19/26 9:39 PM, olcott wrote:       >> On 1/17/2026 3:08 PM, olcott wrote:       >>> For nearly a century, discussions of arithmetic have quietly       >>> relied on a fundamental conflation: the idea that       >>> “true in arithmetic” meant “true in the standard model of ℕ.”       >>> But PA itself has no truth predicate, no internal semantics,       >>> and no mechanism for assigning truth values.              Don't we assume it to be (implicitly) a schematic system, where the       axioms define the deduction rules?              ...              >> ∀x ∈ PA ((True(PA, x) ≡ (PA ⊢ x))       >> ∀x ∈ PA ((False(PA, x) ≡ (PA ⊢ ~x))       >> ∀x ∈ PA (~TruthBearer(PA, x) ≡ (~True(PA, x) ∧ (~False(PA, x))       >>       >>       >       > PA doesn't have a truth predicate, because it CAN'T.        ^^^        a unary truth predicate              but perhaps an operation "IsElementaryTheorem_p(system, objects...)"       for each predicate 'p' can be admitted to an extension of PA.              Perhaps importantly, I note that PA doesn't relate = with ≠ but both       appear in the axioms, naively avoiding the problem of "what do you mean       by 'negation'?" but leaving a problem of "what do you mean by       'contradiction'?"              What resolutions do you perceive regarding that?              --       Tristan Wibberley              The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 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-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