Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!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: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:16:59 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <vf566b$stue$1@dont-email.me>
References: <veoift$29dtl$2@dont-email.me> <veoq3j$2aqp2$1@dont-email.me> <veota3$2baph$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 11:16:59 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c56cb3d89d45ed7901e7fd7a6b935be0";
	logging-data="948174"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/i7cVJ4cg3AR/Nl2a1RnLR"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lHyLh9Mb3RZ3eXN2A8I1jMcXxBo=
Bytes: 1783

On 2024-10-16 17:31:47 +0000, olcott said:

> On 10/16/2024 11:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> When the question: Is finite string X a theory of L?
> has no correct answer from YES and NO, then the question
> is rejected as not a truth bearer.

As I already said:

>> 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