Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN
 --- Saving Democracy
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 07:18:34 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <c387110d758da6bbf53ac0d375264031b70f55e0@i2pn2.org>
References: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me> <vofnj2$1qh2r$2@dont-email.me>
 <vohrmi$29f46$1@dont-email.me> <vojs0e$2oikq$4@dont-email.me>
 <vokdha$2rcqi$1@dont-email.me> <vom1fr$34osr$1@dont-email.me>
 <ee9d41d5f1c2a8dd8ff44d3ddeee20d2c3bcccc1@i2pn2.org>
 <vomgd8$3anm4$2@dont-email.me>
 <f5d6cbae83eb89e411d76d1d9ca801ef2678cec2@i2pn2.org>
 <voojl9$3mdke$2@dont-email.me>
 <855e571c6668207809e1eb67138de6af48d164fa@i2pn2.org>
 <vorlqp$aet5$2@dont-email.me>
 <e174ca1c1cbc58c67ffae3b67b69f63f21a82f86@i2pn2.org>
 <vp69r4$2mdtr$1@dont-email.me>
 <8fa176d46bf5b8c36def9e32ced67a1a3f81bae1@i2pn2.org>
 <vpbhrk$3mfi7$1@dont-email.me>
 <2e999502c40f736a3f3579d23bdb2b42dc74e897@i2pn2.org>
 <vpcurc$irt$5@dont-email.me> <vpeu9s$fd8k$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpfm9i$j7qb$4@dont-email.me> <vphbc4$10f14$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpivav$1fvqe$5@dont-email.me>
 <2eac8f295c49991716a3280ee2793dc56a239ac6@i2pn2.org>
 <vpj5ub$1hb0e$3@dont-email.me>
 <e10e644190a57652eab73c79211bbd633307bab3@i2pn2.org>
 <vpjfts$1nreg$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 12:18:34 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1712272"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vpjfts$1nreg$2@dont-email.me>

On 2/24/25 11:11 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/24/2025 10:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 2/24/25 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 2/24/2025 6:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 2/24/25 6:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 2/24/2025 2:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-02-23 17:35:46 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/23/2025 4:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-22 16:43:24 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My proof is very important because it provides the key
>>>>>>>>> basis for a chat bot that can spot and perfectly refute
>>>>>>>>> lies in real time. This could save the planet and save
>>>>>>>>> Democracy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unlikely to work if you let the chat bot to assume or infer
>>>>>>>> that false <-> true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When its knowledge is correctly encoded it would never make
>>>>>>> that stupid mistake.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you build the bot from a proof that implies that true <-> false
>>>>>
>>>>> THEN YOU ARE ENCODING IT INCORRECTLY.
>>>>> TRUE ↔ FALSE is stupidly wrong.
>>>>> Why are you suggesting something that is stupidly wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Then why do YOU make that claim by saying that when True(LP) returns 
>>>> FALSE, which means that LP is defined as not FALSE, or TRTUE, 
>>>
>>>
>>> To say that Not(true) = false stupidly ignores that
>>> some expressions are not truth-bearers.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But the answer of a truth predicate always is, BY DEFINITION.
>>
> 
> When gibberish is input to a truth predicate it
> always must return not true. This gibberish is
> also not false.

But that "gibberish" is the output of the truth predicate, and 
semantically valid in the system. You seem to ignore that he shows that 
the expresion CAN BE FORMED from the rules of the system, and thus, must 
be answered.

If the "gibberish" must not be true, then True(LP) will be false, and 
thus LP will be true, and thus you systme claims that True(true) is 
false, and thus is broken.

Your brain is just missing on a few cylinders and knocking badly.

And, you are so stupid you are ignoring the flames coming out from under 
your hood.

> 
>> I guess you just don't understand what you are talking about.
> 
>