Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: A different perspective on undecidability
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 19:37:07 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <veoq3j$2aqp2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <veoift$29dtl$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:37:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c2b64c8d9d5f91cba6202ffc6fb76962";
	logging-data="2452258"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19UNFByxnx2rAREITMHPu9h"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:K0VkINsYO8U7ygpK8JnGkI4Yc2U=
Bytes: 1423

On 2024-10-16 14:27:09 +0000, olcott said:

> The whole notion of undecidability is anchored in ignoring the fact that
> some expressions of language are simply not truth bearers.

A formal theory is undecidable if there is no Turing machine that
determines whether a formula of that theory is a theorem of that
theory or not. Whether an expression is a truth bearer is not
relevant. Either there is a valid proof of that formula or there
is not. No third possibility.

-- 
Mikko