Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 06:16:47 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <v9sl6v$2c67u$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v86olp$5km4$1@dont-email.me> <v9oddf$1i745$2@dont-email.me>
 <7f2a1f77084810d4cee18ac3b44251601380b93a@i2pn2.org>
 <v9ogmp$1i745$6@dont-email.me>
 <662de0ccc3dc5a5f0be0918d340aa3314d51a348@i2pn2.org>
 <v9oj4r$1i745$8@dont-email.me>
 <02642e518edd3aa9152cd47e4e527f21ee53a0e8@i2pn2.org>
 <v9okho$1i745$10@dont-email.me>
 <60c0214582c7f97e49ef6f8853bff95569774f97@i2pn2.org>
 <v9p7im$1p6bp$4@dont-email.me>
 <d67278caa0b8782725e806b61adf892028f2bf89@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qd2p$1tedb$10@dont-email.me>
 <4d8c7b1c69915ebbe108d7f4e29cf6172eac7759@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qel5$1tedb$13@dont-email.me>
 <43690773dba43c5d93d11635af0a26532e5be390@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qgn7$1tedb$15@dont-email.me>
 <6272b80d0aeaca324ac8624dce71945edeb59092@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qjg5$1tedb$17@dont-email.me>
 <2e642af254f6140ce8711da64f31d4fd8467d58b@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qkeb$1tedb$19@dont-email.me>
 <f883e0312dcbce8663eaa445348e225687d83959@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qm86$1tedb$22@dont-email.me> <v9sjat$2bubu$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 13:16:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="126bd7503554732891ee2e704ffb1b5d";
	logging-data="2496766"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18PjSpNiJV3fq+WAfdvD3Xx"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zQlsHrKrgu9v9un7/U1NHLwTBvs=
In-Reply-To: <v9sjat$2bubu$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2756

On 8/18/2024 5:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-08-17 17:22:14 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 8/17/2024 12:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>> But usable, until integrated into a Formal Logic system.
>>>
>>
>> No. Just tacking it on at the end of set theory gets rid of RP.
> 
> You needn't. It is provable in naive set theory that no set can be
> a member of itself. The problem is that in naive set theory you can
> also prove that there is a set that is a member of itself. Adding
> new definitions or axioms don't affect either proof. In order to
> remove a proof you must remove an axiom.
> 

I accept whatever process of fully integrating the
change that Richard said.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer