Sujet : Re: A different perspective on undecidability
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : sci.logicDate : 16. Oct 2024, 23:34:51
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vepf2c$2e0v4$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
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.
*I still said that wrong*
(1) There is a finite set of expressions of language
that are stipulated to be true (STBT) in theory L.
(2) There is a finite set of true preserving operations
(TPO) that can be applied to this finite set in theory L.
When formula x cannot be derived by applying the TPO
of L to STBT of L then x is not a theorem of L.
A theorem is a statement that can be demonstrated to be
true by accepted mathematical operations and arguments.
https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Theorem.html-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer