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
Subject: Re: The philosophy of logic reformulates existing ideas on a new
 basis --- infallibly correct
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 20:09:02 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <d52147da29df923d3d4dcc4c4b97b525d9689ea9@i2pn2.org>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vgoand$2464$1@news.muc.de>
 <vgobg7$3tnrn$2@dont-email.me> <vgodcf$kll$1@news.muc.de>
 <vgoed9$3ucjr$1@dont-email.me> <vgoi51$kll$2@news.muc.de>
 <vgojp1$3v611$1@dont-email.me> <vgol50$kll$3@news.muc.de>
 <vgom8r$3vue8$1@dont-email.me> <vgonlv$kll$4@news.muc.de>
 <vgoqv6$qht$2@dont-email.me> <vgq0dv$1trm$1@news.muc.de>
 <vgqifj$e0q0$2@dont-email.me> <vgqnfl$2ca0$1@news.muc.de>
 <vgqt2v$gdj5$2@dont-email.me> <vgr04c$dfn$1@news.muc.de>
 <vgr3vt$hf6i$2@dont-email.me> <vgr5fv$dfn$2@news.muc.de>
 <vh0nm0$1qvhf$1@dont-email.me>
 <6d4aa47c0d4477e38c69f630e2730738b5a84a69@i2pn2.org>
 <vh3b17$2e37l$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 01:09:04 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2350234"; 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: <vh3b17$2e37l$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2249
Lines: 16

On 11/13/24 5:59 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/13/2024 2:38 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Tue, 12 Nov 2024 17:17:20 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>
>>> Incomplete(L) ≡  ∃x ∈ Language(L) ((L ⊬ x) ∧ (L ⊬ ¬x))
>>> When the above foundational definition ceases to exist then Gödel's
>>> proof cannot prove incompleteness.
>> That only defines the term „incomplete”. The non-derivable sentences
>> continue to exist.
>>
> 
> They exist only as incoherent nonsense.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorless_green_ideas_sleep_furiously
> 

YOUR inability to undetstand the well defined terms says nothing about 
them, but a lot about you.