Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy, alt.messianic |
| Subject | Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis |
| Date | 2026-05-16 09:37 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6rh98F91kcU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (24 earlier) <10u3fdq$35fr1$1@dont-email.me> <10u3gi4$376c6$1@dont-email.me> <10u93r6$pc64$1@dont-email.me> <qqCcnbnMg--QG5X3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> <oRydnV2_FcDAEJX3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
Cross-posted to 5 groups.
Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 05/16/2026 07:58 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 05/15/2026 11:45 PM, dart200 wrote: >>> On 5/13/26 8:46 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/13/2026 10:26 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>> On 5/13/26 5:07 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> On 2026-05-13 17:40, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/13/2026 4:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2026-05-13 09:28, olcott wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *The entire body of knowledge that can be expressed in language* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ... is an ill-defined set which only exists in your mind. There's >>>>>>>> over 8 billion people on earth, all of whom believe different, >>>>>>>> often contradictory things. And, with the exception of theorems of >>>>>>>> formal systems, there is nothing that we know with absolute >>>>>>>> certainty. Only varying degrees of certainty, but for every given >>>>>>>> fact you won't get a universal consensus on exactly how certain we >>>>>>>> are of that fact. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So maybe cats were never animals and this "belief" >>>>>>> has always been mass psychosis? In actual reality >>>>>>> cats were always a kind of snake? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I propose that a finite set of "atomic facts" of general >>>>>>> knowledge inherently exists and that no 100% concrete >>>>>>> counter-example can ever be found. >>>>>> >>>>>> Until you can produce this finite set of atomic facts you're all >>>>>> just bluster. Here's a few statements. Which would you consider >>>>>> atomic facts: >>>>>> >>>>>> – The Universe is 14 billion years old. >>>>>> >>>>>> – The Ungulates and the Carnivores form a clade. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Jesus Christ died for our sins. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Nearly 70% of the mass-energy of the universe consists of dark >>>>>> energy. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Anthropogenic climate change is currently occurring. >>>>>> >>>>>> – The Earth is 6000 years old. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Argentinosaurus is the largest land animal to ever have lived. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Measles vaccine causes autism. >>>>>> >>>>>> – There exists an "island of stability" where extraheavy elements >>>>>> with approximately 184 neutrons will have a considerably longer >>>>>> half- life than that of the heaviest elements currently know. >>>>>> >>>>>> – Turing showed that halting cannot be computed. >>>>> >>>>> actually his proof was in regards to circle-free vs circular >>>>> machines, not specifically halting ones. please do read p246 and p247 >>>>> of his paper /on computable numbers/ more carefully. >>>>> >>>> >>>> As with Gödel, I don't give a rat's ass about the convoluted >>>> mess of his paper. Unless we boil these things down to their >>>> barest possible essence they greatly exceed the capacity of >>>> any human mind. >>>> >>>>> and what he showed was that it cannot be computed by a single turing >>>>> machine. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Only because he used a fucking dishonest trick that >>>> proof theoretic semantics would toss out on its ass. >>>> >>>>> no one has demonstrated any _actual_ turing machine with a halting >>>>> behavior that provably cannot be computed by _any_ machine, as such a >>>>> machine would have under-specified, non-determinable semantics that >>>>> then could not actually exist as a real machine, that any actual >>>>> decider would actually have to decide upon... >>>>> >>>>> the theory of computing has predicated itself on a limitation that >>>>> fundamentally resolves to a catch-22 type paradox that has existed >>>>> since turing wrote his first paper /on computable numbers/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> Its essentially the same damn thing as the Liar Paradox >>>> that mindless robot humans still have not agreed on. The >>>> brains of most humans are hard-wired to short-circuit. To >>>> woefully fallible humans textbooks are the word of God. >>>> Proof theoretic semantics sees right through this crap. >>>> >>> >>> it just isn't polcott... >>> >>> the liar's paradox is a sentence that is false, in regards to nothing. >>> what is it false about? who the fuck knows 🤷 >>> >>> godel's sentence is a truth, about nothing, that has no proof. what is >>> that truth?? again, who the fuck knows 🤷🤷 >>> >>> turing's diagonal, however, is computing an explicitly defined object. >>> it is trying to take the n-th digit from the n-th circle-free machine, >>> and constructing it into the n-th digit of a "diagonal" ... and >>> stumbling on the fact it never defined a digit for itself on that >>> diagonal >>> >>> turing's diagonal isn't a "dishonest" trick. he legitimately got stumped >>> by trying to compute an explicitly defined object, and figured it >>> supported godel's result >>> >> >> Ever heard of Yaroslav Sergeyev? >> >> How about Simon Stevin? >> >> You must have heard of Zeno. >> >> Then, I imagine you remember geometry and the compass and edge, >> and about classical constructions. >> >> So, if you add an Archimedean spiral to compass and edge, >> all of a sudden the "angle-trisection" and "squaring the >> circle" and "doubling the cube" are constructible, since >> it's a new elementary object that happens to fulfill >> making it so that these otherwise "impossible" constructions >> are not impossible any-more. >> >> Have you heard of Ruffini-Abel and the insolvability of >> the quintic? It presumes a limited set of elementary >> functions, it doesn't say the quintic doesn't have >> solutions, only as among some usual elementary functions. >> >> So, Turing didn't have a "Zeno machine" architecture, >> while it's figured that nature in its continuity >> solves Turing problems all the time. >> >> >> Then, mathematical idea of the infinite make for that >> number theorists like Erdos make constructions that >> disagree, about the laws of large numbers and limits >> and the inductive limit (beyond classical constructions), >> the "infinite" limit and the "continuum" limit, make >> for things in mathematics that are called "emergence" >> after "convergence" since "convergence" would never arrive. >> >> >> Anyways people can look to Mirimanoff who points out >> that an infinitely-many would have an infinitely-grand, >> and then take Goedel's theorem and point out that >> that's the first obvious thing to Goedel's missing >> sentence to be, "extra-ordinary". >> >> It's obvious, or "duh". >> >> > > And, "The Liar" is false about _nothing_ yet itself. > > It's like, in a world where there is no 'but', only 'yet', > that "the Liar", is the only "but". > > That "there is no but: only yet", is the idea that instead > of excluded-middle being universal, since it isn't and > instead only defines a class of propositions that happen > to be binary predicates, instead that the temporal modal > relevance logic keeps "yet" as proper. > > "There are IFs, there are ANDs, ..., > don't really need any BUTs, ..., yet". > > 'Yet': it's kind of like 'that', and is implicit anywhere. > > Yet that yet that yet that yet that yet that it is so: > that that that that that it is so. > > I find that 'except' paired with 'yet' covers every instance of 'but.' If you can find an exception to this, please show me. -- War in the east War in the west War up north War down south War War
Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-18 07:58 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-19 11:59 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-19 12:21 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-04-19 13:58 -0400
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 13:39 -0700
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-03 10:53 +0300
Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-08 11:58 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-08 10:13 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-08 12:35 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-08 11:40 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-08 14:01 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-10 13:06 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 14:12 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 21:14 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 12:59 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 15:17 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-09 11:10 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-09 11:30 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-09 07:13 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-10 10:10 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 12:38 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 14:06 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-11 10:24 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 06:44 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-12 10:05 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-12 08:32 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-13 12:14 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 06:32 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-14 11:18 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-14 09:40 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-15 08:48 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 09:27 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-16 12:24 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 05:16 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-17 12:08 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 08:48 -0500
Using Olcott's system to prove that Trump lied about election fraud olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-19 15:26 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (Sumerian and Egyptian) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 08:53 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (Sumerian and Egyptian) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 08:55 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 06:18 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 09:20 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 10:28 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 18:40 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 19:45 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 19:51 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 22:27 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-14 20:24 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 08:59 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 22:46 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-15 23:45 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-16 11:42 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 05:08 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 07:58 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 08:29 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 09:37 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 10:16 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 11:38 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 11:44 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 15:30 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 13:22 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 15:21 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 14:46 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 17:10 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 17:24 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 20:46 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-17 20:48 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 08:14 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 11:03 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 09:44 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis ( P(Halts) = P(Rational) ) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 09:51 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis ( P(Halts) = P(Rational) ) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 10:52 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis ( P(Halts) = P(Rational) ) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 11:14 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-21 08:02 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-21 09:54 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-21 12:29 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-21 11:14 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-21 17:45 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis phoenix <j63840576@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 11:52 -0600
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-19 14:49 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-19 15:05 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-18 10:51 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-18 16:37 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 12:55 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-14 10:54 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-14 10:30 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-15 08:44 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 09:24 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-16 12:15 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-16 05:11 -0500
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-17 12:03 +0300
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (algebraic geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 07:46 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (algebraic geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 07:54 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (algebraic geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 08:34 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (algebraic geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 09:08 -0700
Re: Simplifying the Church / Turing thesis (algebraic geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-15 10:31 -0700
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-20 11:49 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-20 08:31 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-21 09:30 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-21 08:22 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-22 10:03 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-22 02:45 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-23 09:35 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-23 08:32 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-24 09:08 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-24 10:01 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-25 11:18 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 07:19 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-26 11:17 +0300
The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 08:37 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-04-26 20:09 -0400
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-27 12:04 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-27 09:38 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-28 10:51 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 07:22 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Catches Liars Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-29 09:51 +0300
The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-24 11:24 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-25 11:20 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 07:25 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-26 11:09 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 08:22 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-04-26 20:14 -0400
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-27 12:22 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-27 09:47 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-28 10:55 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 07:24 -0500
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-29 09:57 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" <is> fully elaborated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-04-30 11:04 +0300
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-23 09:57 -0700
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-20 07:54 -0700
Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fully elaborated --- Correction Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-20 08:32 -0700
csiph-web