Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Simply defining =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=B6del?= Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:38:37 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 30 Message-ID: <87d04ksqqa.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <871rl8dyg1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87lfjfovhm.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87zh7tok63.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <6MednYs8F9v7qYvCnZ2dnUU7-R3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87lfjcmg9p.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87tuxzkswv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20200724092713.661@kylheku.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="fba0b9dd314d56b7e4e59a2cab964ccd"; logging-data="28705"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Ibr/6q4+XQ/Eo3Ne9/W6u" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:G3uorEkt6cLGl1J5hjiMvaLaTrs= sha1:ZsOdcpWVLBf9PHoeTNZVaNyDd9c= Xref: csiph.com comp.theory:21880 olcott writes: > On 7/24/2020 1:06 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote: >> On 7/24/2020 10:31 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> On 2020-07-24, olcott wrote: >>>> OK great I carefully studied that part and totally understand it. When >>>> we get to the next part where a denumerable sequence (s1,s2,s3,...) is >>>> said to satisfy a two place predicate, I don't get it. If you need an >>>> ordered pair to satisfy a relation then you really need a set of ordered >>>> pairs not a set of elements. >>> >>> Because, like, the word "element" could never refer to an ordered pair. >>> >>> If you have a set, if it contains ordered pairs, you must not use the >>> word "elements", only "members". >>> >>> You heard it here, folks! >> >> Not sure this is correct. Consider the sentence "The elements of set >> S are order pairs." I believe that I've heard and read such >> phraseology many many times. "element of" is simply the way to >> vocalize that little e=like symbol in formulas. > > You are correct, Kaz was wrong. Kaz can speak for himself, but I'm fairly sure he was being sarcastic. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */