Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIEcuIElzYWFr?= <agisaak@gm.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Claude.ai provides reasoning why I may have defeated the
 conventional HP proof
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 18:34:06 -0600
Organization: Christians and Atheists United Against Creeping Agnosticism
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <1056s1u$a36q$3@dont-email.me>
References: <1049cr4$10io1$1@dont-email.me> <104dc7p$22du8$1@dont-email.me>
 <104e2cd$2852a$2@dont-email.me> <104fvvp$2qvbi$1@dont-email.me>
 <104gjo8$2uc68$3@dont-email.me> <104ii2r$3egqg$1@dont-email.me>
 <104j9bp$3jrpl$3@dont-email.me> <104l99t$52fb$1@dont-email.me>
 <104lnfv$7l4q$3@dont-email.me> <104nvim$pg20$1@dont-email.me>
 <104ohhs$t0u4$2@dont-email.me>
 <552bda60815dad8175c54eab402e0acc53101155@i2pn2.org>
 <104q24q$1ajbp$1@dont-email.me> <104q3vi$1atq6$1@dont-email.me>
 <104q4ni$1b4t7$1@dont-email.me> <104q6gf$1bcq0$1@dont-email.me>
 <f2cbb68fe579b5dc2438377454298861eaef0577@i2pn2.org>
 <1053l0g$3irf7$1@dont-email.me>
 <37294733af66d0d8acba8f954e48e497650788ce@i2pn2.org>
 <1054ged$3s0eq$1@dont-email.me>
 <d6e818fc3e976909598891fe7c785b16634a544e@i2pn2.org>
 <1055i73$2t13$3@dont-email.me> <1056a57$8j2u$1@dont-email.me>
 <1056cam$8lvo$1@dont-email.me> <1056hhq$a36q$1@dont-email.me>
 <1056ojc$bgl7$1@dont-email.me> <1056p63$a36q$2@dont-email.me>
 <1056pls$bniv$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 02:34:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29e06ceb45adb3799ad640f1db47852d";
	logging-data="330970"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Uudjbp3+GJ1GFZc+2bArx"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EJraPrSe6uHCmUPlz7NAybtSJUQ=
In-Reply-To: <1056pls$bniv$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 2025-07-15 17:53, olcott wrote:
> On 7/15/2025 6:45 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>> On 2025-07-15 17:35, olcott wrote:

>>> You still make the same mistake with the implication operator.
>>> That has always been the wrong operator for PROVES.
>>
>> You're being an idiot. The principle of explosion can be stated either 
>> in terms of implication or proof. I prefer implication. I'm not 
>> mistaking one symbol for another. I'm saying exactly what I intend to 
>> say.
>>
>> André
>>
> 
> Yet implication is not even truth preserving.
> 

You seem to be using some private definition of 'truth preserving'. Did 
you get that one from claude.ai as well?

André

-- 
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail 
service.