Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: sci.logic Subject: Re: How a True(X) predicate can be defined for the set of analytic knowledge Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 14:45:09 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 68 Message-ID: References: <4def165aebe9e5753eeb66673c705370b247a7e3@i2pn2.org> <82344d9130ea950af2f0ff091a19265242b9608a@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 20:45:10 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="573eb7050e522f67e4fe879678fe5346"; logging-data="3445926"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ikPtZYr2dBmUCCOwanyzp" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:SvubZ7k1ifFTcIvnkmkff+K0UYo= X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <82344d9130ea950af2f0ff091a19265242b9608a@i2pn2.org> X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250328-4, 3/28/2025), Outbound message Bytes: 4761 On 3/28/2025 5:33 AM, joes wrote: > Am Thu, 27 Mar 2025 20:44:28 -0500 schrieb olcott: >> On 3/27/2025 6:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 3/27/25 9:03 AM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 3/27/2025 5:58 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>> On 2025-03-26 18:01:14 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> On 3/26/2025 3:36 AM, Mikko wrote: > >>>>>> I am NOT referring to what is merely presented as the body of >>>>>> general knowledge, I am referring to the actual body of general >>>>>> knowledge. Within this hypothesis it is easy to see that True(X) >>>>>> would be infallible. >>>>> >>>>> In that case your True(X) is uncomputable and any theory that >>>>> contains it is incomplete. >>>>> >>>> The body of general knowledge that can be expressed using language is >>>> defined to be complete. The moment that new knowledge that can be >>>> expressed in language comes into existence it is added to the set. >>>> >>> No its not. We KNOW there are things we don't know yet, but hope to. >>> >> As soon as the first person knows new general knowledge and this >> knowledge can be written down (unlike the actual direct physical >> sensation of smelling a rose) >> then this becomes an element of this set of knowledge. >> >>> And, the base of a logic system is STATIC and fixed. >> The set of general knowledge that can be expressed in language has more >> flexibility than that. >> >>> You just don't understand the meaning of the words you are using. >>> >>>> True(X) merely tests for membership in this set; >>>> (a) Is X a Basic Fact? Then X is true. >>> Which makes it not a TRUTH test, but a KNOWLEDGE test, and thus not >>> names right. >> The set of all general knowledge that can be expressed in language is a >> subset of all truth and only excludes unknown and unknowable. > Exactly, it doesn't include the unknown truths and ought to be called > Known(X). It is also contradictory since it gives NO both for unknowns > and their negation. > *The key defining aspect of knowledge is that it is true* When LLM systems have all of the basic facts encoded and are only allowed to perform truth preserving operations on these basic facts: (a) They won't be able to hallucinate (b) They will have the basis to shut down the lies of liars before these lies have any effect. >>>> (b) Can X be derived by applying truth preserving operations >>>>      to Basic Facts? Then X is true. >>> But that isn't the membershop test you just mentioned, and it is that >>> op[eration which Tarski specifically showed can not be done. >>> The problem is TRUTH can be establish via an infinite set of truth >>> perserving operations, but knowledge can not. >> None of this makes any actual difference in the world. >> We won't be able to prevent nuclear Winter and the extinction of >> humanity on the basis of knowing whether or not the Goldbach conjecture >> is true. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer