Liste des Groupes | Revenir à s logic |
On 2024-10-22 15:04:37 +0000, olcott said:Don't want to bother to look at it (AKA uninteresting) is not at
On 10/22/2024 2:39 AM, Mikko wrote:We already know that your position is uninteresting.On 2024-10-22 02:04:14 +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. 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.
>
After being continually interrupted by emergencies
interrupting other emergencies...
>
If the answer to the question: Is X a formula of theory Y
cannot be determined to be yes or no then the question
itself is somehow incorrect.
There are several possibilities.
>
A theory may be intentionally incomplete. For example, group theory
leaves several important question unanswered. There are infinitely
may different groups and group axioms must be true in every group.
>
Another possibility is that a theory is poorly constructed: the
author just failed to include an important postulate.
>
Then there is the possibility that the purpose of the theory is
incompatible with decidability, for example arithmetic.
>An incorrect question is an expression of language that>
is not a truth bearer translated into question form.
>
When "X a formula of theory Y" is neither true nor false
then "X a formula of theory Y" is not a truth bearer.
Whether AB = BA is not answered by group theory but is alwasy
true or false about specific A and B and universally true in
some groups but not all.
See my most recent reply to Richard it sums up
my position most succinctly.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.