Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Infinite proofs do not derive knowledge Peter Olcott's Hand in
 the cookie jar --- bald faced liar
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 20:39:39 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <4dc67db2be217a69761ae8dc59494bde8fb5e7eb@i2pn2.org>
References: <RpKdnUjg8sjx0Bb7nZ2dnZfqlJydnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <2d0b6260615af8afac79ee8de57bcd45c2f2056f@i2pn2.org>
 <v6fk9p$mr5k$1@dont-email.me>
 <8bd5f2159853ff17ef81b27a85141bccc324e7d9@i2pn2.org>
 <v6fkrb$mr5k$2@dont-email.me> <v6fl9a$mr5k$3@dont-email.me>
 <v6huj5$12ktu$2@dont-email.me>
 <7387a77d06e4b00a1c27a447e2744a4f10b25e49@i2pn2.org>
 <v6i08a$12ktu$4@dont-email.me>
 <c81e1794259853dfd7724900ebfab484679615be@i2pn2.org>
 <v6m42j$1tj30$9@dont-email.me> <v6o0an$2bqh7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6oo1j$2fuva$2@dont-email.me> <v72no8$kinb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v73adp$mjis$19@dont-email.me>
 <359671d4a94f2caa82dc3c4884daa2ff73396a8d@i2pn2.org>
 <v74ner$13bn1$2@dont-email.me>
 <d72aa54790eaa53cbe11dfccca12c67249d0d9f6@i2pn2.org>
 <v75st8$19j7l$1@dont-email.me>
 <0c7d3ace11c3a5a50ac7d7beb8b2091114ad82d3@i2pn2.org>
 <v7788t$1h739$1@dont-email.me> <v79m35$22le2$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:39:40 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3650738"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v79m35$22le2$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6365
Lines: 130

On 7/17/24 8:02 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/16/2024 8:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/16/2024 8:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 7/16/24 9:34 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 7/16/2024 6:53 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/15/24 10:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/15/2024 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/15/24 10:06 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/15/2024 3:48 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-11 13:51:47 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 7/11/2024 2:07 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-10 13:58:42 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/8/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/8/24 8:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every expression of language that cannot be proven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or refuted by any finite or infinite sequence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> truth preserving operations connecting it to its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning specified as a finite expression of language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is rejected.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tarski's x like Godel's G are know to be true by an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Every time that you affirm your above error you prove
>>>>>>>>>>>> yourself to be a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is quite obvious that you are the liar. You have not shown 
>>>>>>>>>>> any error
>>>>>>>>>>> above.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Richard said the infinite proofs derive knowledge
>>>>>>>>>> and that infinite proofs never derive knowledge.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That is included in my "not shown above", in particular the 
>>>>>>>>> word "proofs".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/8/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>  > Tarski's x like Godel's G are know to be true by an
>>>>>>>>  > infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We cannot know that anything is true by an infinite
>>>>>>>> sequence of truth preserving operations as Richard
>>>>>>>> falsely claims above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are just mixing up your words because you don't understd that 
>>>>>>> wrores. amnd just making yourself into a LIAR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our KNOWLEDGE that the statement is true, comes from a finite 
>>>>>>> proof in the meta system. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus zero knowledge comes from the infinite proof
>>>>>> You spelled "known" incorrectly as "know" yet claimed
>>>>>> that knowledge comes form an infinite proof.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't even pay attention to your own words ???
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no "infinite proof".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/8/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> *know to be true*
>>>> *know to be true*
>>>> *know to be true*
>>>> *know to be true*
>>>> *know to be true*
>>>> by an infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing can ever be known to be true
>>>> by an infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right, you just don't parse it right because you don't understand 
>>> english.
>>>
>>> the "by" refers to the closer referent.
>>>
>>> it is KNOW TO BE
>>> TRUE BY an infinite sequence of truth persevng operations.
>>>
>>> The infinite sequence establish what makes it True, not what make the 
>>> truth known.
>>>
>>
>> In other words when you are caught with your hand in the
>> cookie jar stealing cookies you deny:
>> (a) That your hand is in the jar
>> (b) That there is a jar
>> (c) That there are any cookies
>>
>> On 7/8/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Tarski's x like Godel's G are know to be true by an
>>  > infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
>>  >
>>
> 
> *From immediately above* [somethings] are
> know to be true by an infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
> 
> Nothing is
> known to be true by an infinite sequence of truth preserving operations.
> 

But it is known to be (true by an infinite sequence of truth preserving 
operations)

So, it is a VALID statement, you are just INTENTIONALLY misinterpreting, 
showing youself to be a LIAR, or you are totally incompetent in the 
understanding of the English language.

You don't seem to know the English grammer rule of preference for 
cloeset referent.

I guess you are just too stupid.

Sorry, you are just a stupid pathological liar.

This is just like your "diagonalization" proof that didn't exist because 
it was nonsene.