Re: Claude.ai provides reasoning why I may have defeated the conventional HP proof

On 7/15/2025 2:28 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:

On 2025-07-15 06:40, olcott wrote:
 

And what is wrong with the analysis given one that page:
>

André G. Isaak's paraphrase of this:
"any statement can be proven from a contradiction"
to this:
((X & ~X) implies Y) is necessarily true.
Is incorrect.

 I wasn't attempting to paraphrase anything. I was simply providing a formula which is true.
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_table#Logical_implication
is a not truth preserving operation.
∀x (⊥ ⊢ x) simply ignores
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction
The necessity operator is typically represented by the symbol □.
(A ∧ ¬A) □ ⊥ (and nothing else)
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer