Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.ai.nat-lang > #2239
| Subject | Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, comp.ai.nat-lang, sci.lang.semantics |
| References | (3 earlier) <rdub1p$ite$1@dont-email.me> <dqydnVY7auEGJJ_CnZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <rdueko$34p$1@dont-email.me> <cY6dnW15TdDE0p7CnZ2dnUU7-aXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <rdvme2$sbq$1@dont-email.me> |
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
| Date | 2020-07-07 15:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <G8KdnXTYRIvMSZnCnZ2dnUU7-K3NnZ2d@giganews.com> (permalink) |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 7/6/2020 12:18 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
> On 2020-07-06 10:20, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/6/2020 12:59 AM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>> On 2020-07-05 23:41, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 7/5/2020 11:58 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>> On 2020-07-05 22:33, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/5/2020 11:06 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2020-07-05 21:52, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/5/2020 5:28 PM, David Kleinecke wrote:
>>>>>>>> > On Sunday, July 5, 2020 at 2:08:57 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Then Goedel showed that that there were propositions that
>>>>>>>> were true
>>>>>>>> > but not provable.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He could not have possibly shown this because the lack of
>>>>>>>> provability makes the expression unsound thus untrue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Soundness and Truth are not the same thing. Unsound does not mean
>>>>>>> untrue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Valid: an argument is valid if and only if it is necessary that if
>>>>>> all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sound: an argument is sound if and only if it is valid and
>>>>>> contains only true premises.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither of those definitions equate soundness and truth.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Soundness guarantees that the conclusion is true.
>>>>
>>>> To precisely paraphrase exactly what it says:
>>>> True premises + valid argument necessitates a true conclusion.
>>>>
>>>>>> https://web.stanford.edu/~bobonich/terms.concepts/valid.sound.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even though the conclusion may be found to be true on some other
>>>>>> basis besides the unsound argument, the conclusion of any unsound
>>>>>> argument does not count ever count as true within the same chain
>>>>>> of inference.
>>>>>
>>>>> That claim is not made in the webpage you refer to, nor is it
>>>>> supported by that webpage, nor is it correct.
>>>>
>>>> Here is a more precise statement:
>>>>
>>>> Within the chain of inference from premises to conclusion ONLY a
>>>> sound argument guarantees a true conclusion.
>>>
>>> Yes. That is true. It doesn't remotely mean that true and sound are
>>> synonyms. 'true' applies to WFFs, not arguments. Sound applies to
>>> arguments, not WFFs. A sound argument is guaranteed to have a true
>>> conclusion. It does not follow from that that the conclusion of an
>>> unsound argument is untrue.
>>
>> It does follow that within the scope of the chain of inference that an
>> unsound argument counts as not proven true, thus untrue meaning that
>> true has not been established.
>
> "Not proven true" and "untrue" are not the same thing. You keep
> conflating what is with what is known.
>
> We do not currently know whether there is life on Europa, though many
> people have entertained the possibility. The fact that we don't know
> this, however, does not change the fact that (for some sufficiently
> precise definition of life) either there IS life on Europa or there
> ISN'T life on Europa. One of those is true. One is false. The fact that
> we don't currently know which is which does not change this fact.
>
>> In other words within the specific scope of this chain of inference
>> there cannot possibly be unsound and true.
>
> Truth doesn't exist relative to some chain of inference. Consider the
> following sentences:
>
> (1) Elizabeth II is Queen of England.
> (2) Gwen Stefani is Queen of England.
>
> The first sentence is true. The second sentence is false. That's despite
> the fact that I haven't even provided any chains of inference.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> (1) Unless you start with premises known to be true (or axioms
>>>>>>>> essentially stipulated to be true)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (2) and have a complete inference chain from these premises (or
>>>>>>>> a formal proof)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (3) to the conclusion (or consequence)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (4) then the whole argument (or WFF) is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Soundness is a property of arguments, not of WFFs. A WFF can be
>>>>>>> true or false, valid or invalid, but it cannot be sound or unsound.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When mathematical logic is required to conform to the sound
>>>>>> deductive inference model then (within the same formal system)
>>>>>> unprovable means untrue. That it does not means this now only
>>>>>> indicates that it currently diverges from the sound deductive
>>>>>> inference model.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have never formally defined this thing you call the "sound
>>>>> deductive inference model".
>>>>
>>>> Never less than 500 times. Here it is simplified:
>>>>
>>>> A sentence φ of theory T is true in T if and only if sentence T is a
>>>> theorem of theory T: True(T, φ) ↔ T ⊢ φ
>>
>> TYPO CORRECTED:
>> -- A sentence φ of theory T is true in T if and only if sentence φ
>> -- is a theorem of theory T: True(T, φ) ↔ T ⊢ φ
>>
>>>
>>> That isn't a definition. It is an *assertion* and one which is
>>> demonstrably false.
>>
>> The above stipulated definition redefines the way that formal proofs
>> work such that they conform to the sound deductive inference model.
>
> Except that it doesn't. What it does is creates a contradiction.
>
> If you were to add that as an axiom to a theory of arithmetic which
> deals with both addition and subtraction, Gödel's theorem would still be
> a valid argument. It would simply be one who's conclusion contradicts
> some axiom. If a valid argument contradicts an axiom, that doesn't make
> the valid argument suddenly become invalid. What it does do is
> demonstrate that the theory in question is inconsistent.
>
> That's all your definition does. It leads to an inconsistent system
> (which is therefore an entirely useless system). It doesn't refute
> Gödel, or Tarski, or anything else.
>
>>>
>>>>> And if you ever do, it will be of no relevance to any claims made
>>>>> by Gödel, Tarski, Church, or any of the other people you like to
>>>>> talk about because their claims pertain to formal systems as they
>>>>> are defined within mathematical logic. Not to "sound deductive
>>>>> inference models".
>>>>
>>>> Tarski "proved" that True(T, φ) cannot possibly ever be fully
>>>> defined in any formal system what-so-ever. He did this (crazy as it
>>>> sounds) on the basis that his theory could not prove the liar paradox.
>>>>
>>>> IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ANYONE THAT SELF-CONTRADICTORY SENTENCES ARE
>>>> NOT TRUTH BEARERS ???
>>>
>>> You need to define 'self-contradictory' sentence and redefine
>>> 'truth-bearer' to get the above claim to work.
>>
>> Since I am only talking about one kind of sentence that is not a truth
>> bearer to keep things simple I will only talk about self-contradictory
>> expressions of language.
>>
>> A self-contradictory expression of language is any expression of
>> language such that assuming a truth value of true leads to a
>> contradiction and assuming the value of false leads to a contradiction.
>>
>> "This sentence is not true" if it was true that would make it false.
>> "This sentence is not true" if it was false that would make it true.
>>
>>> You also need to learn the difference between completeness and
>>> consistency. A sentence such as the liar paradox is *not* something
>>> that leads to incompleteness. It leads to inconsistency.
>>>
>>
>> I we begin with the axiom that contradiction removes an inference
>> chain from consideration then inconsistency is always precluded.
>
> But that's not how axioms work.
>
> You're trying to find a way of basically taking results you don't like
> and finding some way of ignoring them. That simply doesn't work.
>
> A good historical example of this would be Pythagoras. Pythagoras' most
> important discovery was not the Pythagorean theorem (that had been known
> long before him; he may have been one of the first to provide an actual
> proof, but probably wasn't *the* first). It was that the Pythagorean
> theorem could be used as the basis for a proof that incommensurable
> quantities exist (what would today be called irrational numbers).
>
> The problem was that this directly contradicted one of the main tenets
> of the Pythagorean religion which claimed that everything in nature
> could be explained in terms of musical intervals (i.e ratios of whole
> numbers). So he basically decided to try to hide his fact from the rest
> of the world and went so far as to drown any of his followers who
> mentioned his discovery.
>
> Unfortunately for him, proven results don't just magically go away if
> you try to ignore or hide them. But that's basically what you are doing
> here (minus the drowning, I hope). You're saying that your rule
> "removes" things from an inference chain which basically means that it
> tries to sweep them under the rug.
>
>>>> It would then be possible to reconstruct the antinomy of the liar in
>>>> the metalanguage, by forming in the language itself a sentence x
>>>> such that the sentence of the metalanguage which is correlated with
>>>> x asserts that x is not a true sentence.
>>>>
>>>> In doing this it would be possible, by applying the diagonal
>>>> procedure from the theory of sets, to avoid all terms which do not
>>>> belong to the metalanguage, as well as all premisses of an empirical
>>>> nature which have played a part in the previous formulations of the
>>>> antinomy of the liar.
>>>
>>> The above paragraph is gibberish.
>>
>> That is a verbatim quote of Tarski's analysis from which he derived
>> his undefinability theorem his paper:
>> http://www.liarparadox.org/247_248.pdf
>
> It is a quote with insufficient context to be interpretable. You need to
> quote what came before it for it to make any sense whatsoever.
>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> (5) unsound (or untrue).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (6) The sound deductive inference model forms the correct
>>>>>>>> axiomatic basis of truth making true and unprovable totally
>>>>>>>> impossible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because this is as obvious as a pie in the face and I have been
>>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "obvious as pie in the face" and "flat-out wrong" are not the
>>>>>>> same thing. What you are claiming is flat-out wrong. Sound and
>>>>>>> True are not the same things. Provable and True are not the same
>>>>>>> things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A sound argument derives a true conclusion and an unsound or
>>>>>> invalid argument does not derive a true conclusion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When mathematical logic is required to conform to the sound deductive
>>>>>
>>>>> Required by whom? Certainly not by you given that you have no
>>>>> authority to require anything of anyone. You can propose
>>>>> non-standard definitions to your hearts content. You can make
>>>>> proclamations about how maths *should* work to your hearts content.
>>>>> Mathematics will proceed happily along using the standard
>>>>> definitions and completely ignoring your various proclamations.
>>>>>
>>>>> André
>>>>
>>>> When the sound deductive inference model is the architectural basis
>>>> of the notion of formal system
>>>
>>> but it isn't, so this is irrelevant.
>>>
>>>> Tarski's claim that no formal system can possibly fully define the
>>>> notion of True(T, φ) is proven to be false.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore when the sound deductive inference model is the
>>>> architectural basis of the notion of formal system True(T, φ) and
>>>
>>> but again, it isn't, so this is irrelevant.
>>
>> He said no formal system can do X, I provided a formal system that
>> does X, Tarski is proved wrong.
>>
>>>> unprovable(T, φ) cannot possibly co-occur.
>>>>
>>>> So like I have been saying for 24 threads:
>>>> Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your personal beliefs on what words ought to mean has absolutely no
>>> bearing on what they actually mean. It is very clear that in English,
>>> as well as in logic and maths, true and provable are not synonyms.
>>
>> You slip/side and dodge on this point (always referring to he said she
>> said) rather than actually analyzing the logic of it.
>>
>> Do you understand that self contradictory sentences can neither be
>> proved or disproved?
>
> Self contradictory sentences can be *both* proven and disproven.
>
>> Do you understand that these are self-contradictory sentences:
>> (a) "This sentence is not true."
>> (b) "This sentence cannot be proved."
>
> The first is. The second isn't. Neither play a role in Gödel or Tarski.
> [see my previous post for a more detailed explanation].
>
In order to avoid confusion when dealing with more than
one theory, we write Γ ⊢S C, adding the subscript S to
indicate the theory in question.
If Γ is the empty set ∅, then ∅ ⊢ C if and only if C
is a theorem. It is customary to omit the sign “∅” and
simply write ⊢C. Thus, ⊢C is another way of asserting
that C is a theorem. (Mendelson 2015: 28)
Mendelson, Elliott 2015. Introduction To Mathematical Logic.
Boca Raton: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.
I write C is a theorem of S like this: S ⊢ C and C is not a theorem of S
like this S ⊬ C. Does that make sense?
For this sentence to be true: ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ)
there must be a formal proof that shows that there exists a sentence φ
of theory T such that sentence φ has the same truth value as its own
unprovability.
If the LHS of ↔ has the truth value of true for logical equivalence the
RHS must also have a truth value of true.
For the LHS to have a value of true there must be a proof that there is
no proof of φ. If there is no proof of φ then it does not have a truth
value of true. CONTRADICTION !!!
Satisfiability
A formula is satisfiable if it is possible to find an interpretation
(model) that makes the formula true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satisfiability
Interpretation (logic)
An interpretation is an assignment of meaning to the
[non-logical] symbols of a formal language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_(logic)
∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) is unsatisfiable.
--
Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott
Back to comp.ai.nat-lang | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 22:52 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 22:06 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 23:33 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 22:58 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-06 00:41 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 23:59 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-06 11:20 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-06 11:18 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 13:13 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 15:00 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 14:17 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 15:25 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 14:50 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 17:12 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 18:27 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 19:43 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-07 19:28 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 21:31 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-07 21:29 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 22:57 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-08 12:27 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 14:19 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 08:41 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 08:03 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 09:17 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-10 12:41 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 09:26 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 21:52 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-07 23:00 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 ∃φ (φ ↔ T ⊬ φ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 22:43 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 00:16 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-07 23:39 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 00:54 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-08 00:14 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 10:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-08 09:50 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 11:09 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 11:29 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 11:49 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-09 06:56 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 11:02 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-09 11:33 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 23:23 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-10 12:13 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 23:50 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 12:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-09 07:40 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 11:14 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-09 12:14 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 23:28 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-10 11:54 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-10 14:46 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 16:16 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-10 17:20 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 16:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 09:12 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 09:29 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 09:42 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 10:54 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 10:55 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 11:02 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 12:16 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 11:27 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 13:04 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 12:12 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 15:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 14:27 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 15:42 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-10 15:00 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 16:36 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 20:19 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-11 04:20 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-11 19:24 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-11 18:57 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (TRUTH BEARER DEFINED) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-11 22:58 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (TRUTH BEARER DEFINED) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 00:37 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 11:43 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 12:07 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 13:51 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 13:36 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 15:31 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 16:24 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 15:37 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 18:04 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 17:21 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 18:53 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 18:07 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 19:44 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 18:58 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 23:06 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-13 07:01 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 09:32 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-13 08:47 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 19:52 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (NATURE OF TRUTH ITSELF) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 09:07 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 13:35 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-11 19:05 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 13:24 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-12 14:04 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 18:48 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-12 17:22 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 19:52 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-12 19:32 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-12 22:47 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-13 08:05 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 19:49 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 19:11 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 09:43 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-14 08:57 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 10:22 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-14 09:30 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 10:38 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-15 11:24 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 19:18 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-15 20:38 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 16:16 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-16 16:01 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 19:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-16 18:40 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-13 23:48 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 10:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-14 09:20 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 10:26 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-14 09:36 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 10:41 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-14 11:25 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 10:52 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-15 11:04 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 19:07 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-15 18:42 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 12:10 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 11:46 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 16:35 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 15:19 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 23:19 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-16 22:49 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 00:34 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-17 01:04 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 17:20 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-17 16:16 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 18:59 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-18 03:13 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 11:46 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 11:05 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 12:12 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 11:30 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 12:36 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-19 20:51 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 15:28 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-19 22:23 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 10:33 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-20 10:50 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 12:40 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-21 01:52 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 17:04 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 17:09 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 [--Obvious Yet?--] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 14:58 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 18:33 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 17:46 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 09:36 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-14 09:53 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 10:49 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 18:45 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 17:52 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 21:12 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 20:11 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 22:48 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 00:03 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 00:32 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 10:14 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> - 2020-07-14 18:24 +0000
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 17:44 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> - 2020-07-15 18:08 +0000
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 18:47 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 22:06 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-14 17:00 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 18:15 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-15 02:56 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 21:55 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-14 23:13 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Mapping to Boolean) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 09:57 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-15 16:48 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 11:46 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-15 11:32 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 19:13 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-16 01:37 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 14:18 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 13:32 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 22:39 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 21:00 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-17 02:17 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 17:39 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-17 16:06 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 18:40 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 17:47 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-17 18:01 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 22:24 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 21:34 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 22:44 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 22:01 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-18 13:34 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-17 21:09 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-18 10:14 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-18 15:05 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 17:23 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 18:52 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 18:01 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 22:35 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 21:55 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Membership algorithm) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-18 13:49 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-15 18:23 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 11:51 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 11:21 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 13:41 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 13:10 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 22:36 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 21:04 -0700
Re: Simply defining G"odel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 17:00 -0500
Re: Simply defining G"odel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 17:40 -0600
Re: Simply defining G"odel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-17 17:46 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-17 17:07 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-15 20:25 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 16:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 14:31 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 22:45 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 21:10 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-16 15:58 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-16 22:47 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-16 21:18 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-16 22:38 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-16 00:35 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-15 20:44 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-12 18:53 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-12 23:48 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 00:58 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-13 13:07 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 14:12 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-13 15:32 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 15:06 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-14 00:56 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-13 23:26 +0100
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-13 16:10 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-13 09:57 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-13 13:12 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-10 12:53 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 16:25 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-10 15:06 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-10 17:21 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-11 04:10 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-11 19:13 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-08 12:39 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 23:37 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-09 00:40 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 09:38 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 09:18 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-09 12:15 -0700
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Are we there yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 15:10 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V27 (Simple enough yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 16:25 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V27 (Simple enough yet?) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-09 07:02 -0600
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V27 (Simple enough yet?) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-09 11:11 -0500
Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V24 (Shell game) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-08 19:04 -0500
csiph-web