Path: ...!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: Mathematical incompleteness has always been a misconception --- Ultimate Foundation of Truth Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2025 18:57:41 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 59 Message-ID: References: <7e3e9d35d880cfcad12f505dfb39c5650cdd249e@i2pn2.org> <3cf165ef9793e844dc9d5db82aecbc47f9545367@i2pn2.org> <080bf2b1c322247548c6ec61c9f054359062ccd4@i2pn2.org> <6fc61a762b56308f9919993f29ba3e77f7ba84c7@i2pn2.org> <6320ec8cdc4ab9fc06e5001c0b4069132ce1af58@i2pn2.org> <118757d760bdecf247749f20c8c9b15518be3d33@i2pn2.org> <56fcc6eb9839729ce5cfee96343d6fab7d7a4811@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2025 01:57:43 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0a4c634d78a3c572e27d924fefebd45f"; logging-data="495235"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18sufD9xB3CGYdMq18Un1ME" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:zlxmuZ4wNGvpQNw9a1hOtl/JH10= X-Antivirus-Status: Clean In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250301-6, 3/1/2025), Outbound message Bytes: 4286 On 3/1/2025 4:02 PM, dbush wrote: > On 3/1/2025 4:06 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/1/2025 6:49 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 2/28/25 7:06 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 2/28/2025 8:30 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 2/27/25 11:06 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 2/27/2025 7:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 2/27/25 9:33 AM, olcott wrote:>> >>>>>>>> Yes logic is broken when it does not require a truth-maker >>>>>>>> for every truth. It is also broken when its idiomatic meaning >>>>>>>> of the term "provable" diverges from the meaning of the term >>>>>>>> truth-maker. That every truth must have a truth-maker is outside >>>>>>>> the scope of what you understand. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But it does, it just you don't seem to understand what a truth >>>>>>> makee is? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where was a statement without a truth-maker used? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Logic remains clueless about the philosophical >>>>>> notion of truth makers and truth bearers and this is >>>>>> why logic gets these things incorrectly. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No, you remain clueless about the notion of Logic and its rules. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Only because logic defines "True" in a way that goes against the >>>> way that True really works is it impossible to define a truth >>>> predicate in logic. >>> >>> No, it doesn't >>> >>>> >>>> The biggest mistake that logic makes is failing to understand >>>> that an expression can only be true when it has a truth bearer. >>> >>> No it doesn't, it just allows the truth bearer to be an infinite >>> number of steps away from the statement. >>> >> >> When we don't make a screwy term-of-the-art meaning >> of provable(math) that diverges from provable(common) >> {whatever the Hell makes X true} then incompleteness(math) >> ceases to exist. >> > > Then let's make a new term you're comfortable with. > What I just said says it all. Anything else is a dishonest dodge away from the point. Provable(common) has always made incomplete(math) impossible. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer