Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of logic reformulates existing ideas on a new
 basis --- infallibly correct
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 15:54:01 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <vgra1q$ikr6$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$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$2@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 22:54:02 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5e3d204d1939e67d6d9b2cbe8090f3d7";
	logging-data="611174"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/8b/SeJcchdmO4V7b/tOjS"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:deulmTahc8Ui6MuwX5AOLmhu4u0=
In-Reply-To: <vgr5fv$dfn$2@news.muc.de>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241110-4, 11/10/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2981

On 11/10/2024 2:36 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/10/2024 1:04 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> 
> [ .... ]
> 
>>> I have addressed your point perfectly well.  Gödel's theorem is correct,
>>> therefore you are wrong.  What part of that don't you understand?
> 
>> YOU FAIL TO SHOW THE DETAILS OF HOW THIS DOES
>> NOT GET RID OF INCOMPLETENESS.
> 
> The details are unimportant.  Gödel's theorem is correct. 

In other words you simply don't understand these
things well enough to understand that when we change
their basis the conclusion changes.

You are a learned-by-rote guy that accepts what you
memorized as infallible gospel.

> Your ideas
> contradict that theorem.  

When we start with a different foundation then incompleteness
ceases to exist just like the different foundation of ZFC
eliminates Russell's Paradox.

Have you ever heard of ZFC or Russell's Paradox or are these
things nonsense to you as well?

> Therefore your ideas are incorrect.  Again, the
> precise details are unimportant, 

So you have no clue how ZFC eliminated Russell's Paradox.
The details are unimportant and you never heard of ZFC
or Russell's Paradox anyway.

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