Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: This is how I overturn the Tarski Undefinability theorem
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2024 17:31:23 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <vbkcfr$1v1fg$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vavohi$140m1$1@dont-email.me> <vb1o2v$1gbmn$1@dont-email.me> <vb1r8k$1g7lq$3@dont-email.me> <vb3quu$1t290$1@dont-email.me> <vb4cv3$2r7ok$3@dont-email.me> <vb6ouc$3achu$1@dont-email.me> <vb70ah$3b4ub$1@dont-email.me> <vbeqjh$qc12$1@dont-email.me> <vbes5c$punj$11@dont-email.me> <vbh37k$19rlv$1@dont-email.me> <vbhj5c$1c7u5$2@dont-email.me> <vbjo7m$1s9qb$1@dont-email.me> <vbk688$1u1js$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2024 16:31:24 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dd9d2cc639f13179d78eef7a9cb98700";
	logging-data="2065904"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/z+fEpfdbNgBQ/2wvRiLLz"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:91JwC72Q6DIY1nocvs5fE2EFvY0=
Bytes: 2467

On 2024-09-08 12:44:56 +0000, olcott said:

> On 9/8/2024 3:45 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-09-07 13:06:52 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 9/7/2024 3:35 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-09-06 12:22:04 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The fundamental architectural overview of all Prolog implementations
>>>>> is the same True(x) means X is derived by applying Rules (AKA truth 
>>>>> preserving operations) to Facts.
>>>> 
>>>> The details are permitted to differ.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Instead of using any single order of logic we simultaneously
>>> represent an arbitrary number of orders of logic in a type
>>> hierarchy knowledge ontology.
>> 
>> The type system of Prolog is different.
>> 
> 
> Yes I know that. The architecture of Prolog is used
> the implementation details are scrapped.
> 
> ?- LP = not(true(LP)).
> LP = not(true(LP)).
> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).
> false. // LP is rejected as cyclic
> 
> Even with Prolog just the way it is it is not as stupid
> as Tarski's system that doesn't know to reject the Liar
> Paradox.
> 
> https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_247_248.pdf

Most Prolog implementations don't reject L = not(ture(LP)).

-- 
Mikko