Path: ...!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 02:34:17 +0000
Subject: Re: The Suspicious Journals of Ross A. Kosmanson :-)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.math
References: <vrt4e1$bjf1$1@solani.org> <67E23BA4.7FC7@ix.netcom.com>
 <64n4uj10rar2j35rp2pe4k7128bkl9c456@4ax.com>
 <7tadnTJGQpDgS3_6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <DSednREvYdNz-X76nZ2dnZfqnPUd5_oN@giganews.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 19:34:10 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DSednREvYdNz-X76nZ2dnZfqnPUd5_oN@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <W_GdnegJpPk0-n76nZ2dnZfqnPoAAAAA@giganews.com>
Lines: 1692
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-ccE23P4OTbE8pjwOxUnKyyvaKeAtlpnJ8BD/u2BgC73/vZaZzX430OuiQ+3QVxl8OJevSCpMZ3pZpEA!kyYLIQk3sjnWuJvYX8xmiE8sabvRta9dyn7WyYT01rszuhDs/ZgbdGXDEr62OBZmO2EXZ2GmZPI=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 80245

On 03/25/2025 07:22 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 03/25/2025 09:14 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> On 03/25/2025 12:38 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> If I hadn't made myself clear, I will now...
>>>
>>> In other words, ..there...is...no...suchs... things.... as....
>>> numbers.
>>>
>>> Numbers do not exist!
>>>
>>> Do I make myself clear?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 22:14:12 -0700, The Starmaker
>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To enter the world of platonism, you need a platonic Ouija board.
>>>>
>>>> Then everyone can make contact with...The Platonic world.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUUUUNNNNN!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's like touching Plato himself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You just crossed over into...The Platonic Zone!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUN-DUUUUNNNNN!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Physfitfreak wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> First came continuum mechanics. The lattice of whispering variables. A
>>>>> conspiracy of Redshift and Relephants.
>>>>>
>>>>> The walls of the cosmos are not walls but confidence intervals,
>>>>> throbbing with the static of Them — the ones who mistake "does not
>>>>> invalidate" for confirmation. So we deciphered the redshift’s hum:
>>>>> it’s
>>>>> not expansion but a ledger of sins, a type I error masquerading as
>>>>> revelation. The crows cackle in p-values, and the mailman’s pupils
>>>>> dilate like funnel plots — YOU ARE THE BRIDGE between formalism
>>>>> and the
>>>>> Relephant, who never forgets the true unknown distribution.
>>>>>
>>>>> The textbooks preach falsification, yet their spines crack under the
>>>>> weight of platonism - formalism vacillation. The moon’s craters
>>>>> are Q-Q
>>>>> plots; its light is a biased estimator. They call it cosmology — I
>>>>> call
>>>>> it eczema of the epistemic, itching with Skolem’s paradox. The
>>>>> dermatologist (a sci.math frequenter) insists it’s random, but the
>>>>> lesions spell "Russell’s fiat" in Bayesian glyphs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I stack my journals in Fibonacci spirals to appease the arithmetic
>>>>> spiders. They spin null hypotheses, not silk. The television’s
>>>>> static is
>>>>> a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test — I am always on trial. Like Physfit's
>>>>> dick.
>>>>> The jury wears my face, chanting "Fail to reject!", but in
>>>>> palindromes!
>>>>> The ‘O’ is a confidence ring, tightening.
>>>>>
>>>>> The flying-rainbow-sparkle-ponies of abstract objects? Mere pipe
>>>>> dreams.
>>>>> The Relephant tramples your inductive authority, remembers the
>>>>> axiomless
>>>>> deductions that broke Mirimanoff’s spine. Time is a stuttering
>>>>> Poisson
>>>>> process; I lock the clocks away. The typewriter’s ‘E’ sticks
>>>>> — They oil
>>>>> it to slow my epistemic escape velocity, which is just continuum
>>>>> mechanics.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ross A. Kosmanson
>>>>> March 24, 2025
>>>>> In the Library of Ashurbanipal
>>
>>
>>
>> Most thinkers and researchers in foundations
>> arrive at platonism, again, since it's always
>> been so great.
>>
>> It's sort of like Gadamer, with "amicus Plato",
>> and not so much like Newton, with "hypotheses
>> non fingo", since Newton confused poor interpretations
>> of Platonistic idealism with invalidating his theory
>> as with regards to what's "true".
>>
>>
>> Let's see some more from Kosmanson, see if he arrives
>> at something a bit more than exercise in style.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Opportunistic departure from ordinary language in
>> a narrow sense is part of ordinary linguistic behavior.
>> Some departures, if the need for them persists, may be
>> adhered to, thus becoming ordinary language in the narrow
>> sense; and herein lies one factor in the evolution of
>> language."  -- Quine, Word & Object, "Aims and Claims of Regimentation"
>>
>>
>> As idealism generally, platonism is always a thing,
>> and numbers are definitely real platonic objects
>> as members of the universe of mathematical objects,
>> which one may aver is all that there is to be all
>> of space time, then as with regards to the plastic,
>> the metal, the concrete _numbers_, as what we are.
>>
>>
>> Not to be confused with the Bible's book "Numbers: a body count".
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks GG. Comment on "axiomless natural deduction" and "axiomless
> geometry".
>
>
>
> When discussing "axiomless natural deduction" and "axiomless geometry,"
> it's important to clarify what "axiomless" truly means in these
> contexts. It's rarely the case that these systems operate with
> absolutely no foundational principles. Instead, the focus is on
> minimizing or shifting the emphasis away from traditional axiomatic
> frameworks.
>
> Here's a breakdown:
>
> Axiomless Natural Deduction:
>
>      Shift from Axioms to Inference Rules:
>          Natural deduction systems prioritize inference rules over
> axioms. This means that logical reasoning is primarily driven by how
> conclusions are derived from premises, rather than relying on a set of
> pre-established truths (axioms).
>          The "natural" aspect refers to how these inference rules aim to
> mirror the way humans naturally reason.
>      Emphasis on Assumptions:
>          Natural deduction heavily utilizes assumptions, which can be
> introduced and later "discharged" during a proof. This allows for more
> flexible and intuitive reasoning.
>
>      While some foundational logical principles are inherent in the
> structure of the inference rules, the explicit need for numerous
> traditional axioms is reduced.
>
> Contrast with Hilbert-Style Systems:
>
>      This approach contrasts with Hilbert-style axiomatic systems, which
> rely heavily on axioms and fewer inference rules (often just modus ponens).
>
>      "Axiomless" Nuance:
>          It's more accurate to say that natural deduction minimizes the
> role of explicit axioms. The structure of the inference rules themselves
> embodies fundamental logical principles.
>
> Axiomless Geometry:
>
>      Challenging Euclidean Axioms:
>          Historically, Euclidean geometry was built upon a set of
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========