Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability)

From	Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.theory
Subject	Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability)
Date	2020-07-27 14:12 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<87blk1f6er.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <KICdnZQ7S4KjY4HCnZ2dnUU7-e3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87zh7mgiux.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vY-dnW0ku6B8ZYDCnZ2dnUU7-XXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <877duphmxf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EcKdneaehpPk0YPCnZ2dnUU7-QnNnZ2d@giganews.com>

Show all headers | View raw

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 7/26/2020 6:33 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/26/2020 2:46 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/24/2020 8:28 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/24/2020 5:49 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/22/2020 6:54 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>> <cut>
>>>>>>>>> My understanding: [predicates are functions that evaluate to Boolean]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Take care here.  That's programmer language.  The interpretation of a
>>>>>>>> predicate is a set of pairs.  There's not really any evaluation and
>>>>>>>> there is definitely no need for a predicate to be computable.  See the
>>>>>>>> next comment for why the distinction actually helps.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh I see the predicate Father_of(x, y) normally evaluates to Boolean
>>>>>>> for a specific ordered pair of individual people. As a relation on a
>>>>>>> domain it defines the whole set of ordered pairs that satisfy that
>>>>>>> relation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It /is/ the set of pairs that are in the relation.  It does not
>>>>>> "evaluate to Boolean".  Nothing is evaluated.  For a relation R the
>>>>>> notation R(x, y) is just another way of writing (x, y) ∈ R.
>>>>>
>>>>> Closed WFF are true or false, Open WFF specify sets.
>>>>
>>>> True!  But I don't know why you say it here.
>>>
>>> Making sure that my understanding is correct.
>>
>> I asked why /here/.  The fact that you say it here where it is
>> irrelevant makes me suspect you don't understand the concepts, despite
>> having said a true thing.  Was it in reply to what I said or a random
>> true thing you thought you'd say?
>>
>
> I have never worked with open WFF before. I have known what they are for a few years. I had no idea that they specified solution set. I always thought that the had the Boolean valid of I_DONT_KNOW.
>
>>>>>>> constant h1 ∈ human beings
>>>>>>> constant h2 ∈ human beings
>>>>>>> (h1,h2) ∈ Father_of(x, y) would assert that h1 is the father of h2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please, for the moment, no poems.  None of that is written correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> To use the Mendelson notation (a26, a87) ∈ Father_of(x, y)
>>>>> would be true or false.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, I don't have time to teach you how to write mathematics,
>>>> but the key is precision.  I can take a guess at what you mean, but
>>>> that's not what the symbols are for.  They should remove the need for
>>>> guessing.
>>>
>>> It is crucially important that I understand how to encode constants in
>>> WFF.
>>
>> Then you are on your own because I don't know what you mean by encode.
>> I will concentrate on trying to help you understand languages and
>> interpretations.
>
> When I use the word "encode" it comes from the communication process and is a key element of all human communication.
>
> I spent over an hour recreating this graph so please glance at it.
> http://www.liarparadox.org/Communication_Process.png
>
>>
>>> The ordered pair of two particular individual humans: (a26, a87) a26
>>> is either the father of a87 or not.
>>
>> There are always two kinds of formula involved here.  There are those of
>> the formal language, and those we use to talk about an interpretation.
>> If you don't make it clear which you are talking about there is no way I
>> can understand you.
>>
>
>
> Thus Father_of(a26, a87) would be Boolean where a26, a87 are in the
> Domain of Humans.

I'm going to stop commenting on this sort of issue.  You won't say what
Father_of is and you won't even say what language you are using.
Mendelson uses 'a' with a subscript for constants in a formal language,
but you talk of a26 and a87 as being "in the domain" (with a capital
letter for some reason).  I just don't have time to try to unravel what
you mean.  It's possible that even you don't know if Father_of is a
predicate or a function symbol in the formal language, or a
corresponding relation or function in some interpretation of it.

I note that despite my trying to get you do it, you have not specified a
formal language and its interpretation.  I think it would really help if
you did.  Remember my suggestion to give a language for Q and at least
one interpretation of it?

>> But I will say that the usual terminology is to talk about constants (or
>> 0-ary functions) in the formal language, and individuals in the
>> interpretation.
>
> Mendelson refers to constants in the intpretation.

He refers to them in the language, not in its interpretation.  There are
no constants in an interpretation.

> d. For each individual constant a_i of L, an assignment of some fixed
> element (a_i)^M of D.

The constants are symbol in the language.  The interpretation just has
corresponding elements of D.

>> Some people use an arrow for
>> implication as well.  There are just not enough symbols to go round, but
>> we can use ⇒ for the logical connective so → should be clear.
>>
>>> Father_of: Humans ⇒ Humans
>>
>> No, what I wrote.
>
> Your use of ASCII could mean many far too many different things.
> UTF-8 is precise.

No, it's the context that disambiguates.  Or the author reminds the
reader of the symbol she is using.  (And surely you mean Unicode.  UTF-8
is just a transfer format.)

> So once a predicate is anchored to a relation in a specific domain
> then the syntax specifies semantics?

Yes.

>>> Are these correct:
>>> An open n-ary predicate specifies a set of n-tuples.
>>
>> Hm... not really.  It's the relation the predicate is identified with
>> that matters, and it's a formula, not a predicate that is satisfied.
>
> The predicate merely specifies the order of its arguments.

All you know about a predicate is its 'arity' -- the number of
'arguments'.  As to order, P(a, b) is not the same formula as P(b, a)
but I would not say that a predicate "specifies the order of its
arguments".

> The WFF specifies some of the meaning of the predicate.

We write formulas -- specifically axioms and definitions -- with that
intention, but the key point is that there is no meaning without an
interpretation.  The goal of all this is be able to answer the question
of whether a theory (a language + axioms + inference rules) has a model
-- an interpretation in which the axioms are true.  Most working
mathematicians then forget about the model and think of the theory as
actually being about the domain of their preferred model, but it's
always really anything that is a model of the theory.

> Whenever a WFF depends upon any semantics outside of the scope formal
> language the variables or constants of the WFF must refer to a domain
> of discourse.

I don't like that wording.  I don't know what you mean by most of it.

> To determine whether or not propositional WFF are satisfied may not
> require a domain of discourse outside of propositional logic.
> ∀p∀q  (¬(p ∧ q) ↔ ¬(¬p ∨ ¬q)) can be verified with truth tables.

That can be formally seen as an interpretation.  The domain is usually
taken to be {t, f} and the function symbols of the language (¬, ∧, ∨, ↔)
are associated with functions from {t, f}^n to {t, f} (n is 1 for ¬ and
2 for the others).  The result is a closed formula that is true.

>> Both the formulas R(x, x) and R(x, y) may be satisfied in some
>> interpretation -- i.e. they "specify a set of n-tuples -- but the
>> predicate on it's own does not.  Note the the arity of n-tuples is
>> determined by the formula, not the predicate.
>
> How would we specify a 4-tuple formula that is tied to a 2-ary
> predicate?

Did you study the example?  R is a binary predicate, and yet the formula
R(x, x) is satisfied by a set of 1-tuples -- plain elements of D.  R(x,
y) is satisfied by pairs and, R(x, y+z) by triples.  The predicate has
an arity, the formula has a number of free variables.  The two numbers
are not always the same.

Maybe you can now answer your own question -- a formula using a binary
predicate that is satisfied by one or more 4-tuples.

> It would seem best to have all of the unbound variables as arguments
> to the predicate.

You are, I think, talking about a sort of "natural" formula consisting
of only an n-ary predicate with n distinct variables.  But no one needs
that to talk about the corresponding n-tuples that satisfy it in some
interpretation.  Can you see why?  (Think a bit before you read on.)
.
.
.
.
It's because there is already a name for that set of pairs -- it's just
the relation that is associated with the predicate symbol.  Take a
language with a binary predicate F.  Under the interpretation that has
domain "humans" and associates F with the relation is_the_father_of the
set of pairs the satisfy F(x1, x2) is just call is_the_father_of.

>>> An closed n-ary predicate specifies a Boolean value.
>>
>> Closed is a property of formulas.  All closed formulas of a language L
>> are either true of false under some interpretation of L.  I can guess
>> what you mean by "a closed predicate" but it's not helpful.
>
> I always think of the name of the predicate as specifying the name of
> the formula the same way that the name of a computer science function
> refers to its body.

I hope that analogy does not cause you problems.

>>> A function specifies one element of the domain.
>>
>> Kind of.  A function symbol, in the formal language, specifies nothing.
>> In some interpretation, a function is a mapping from D^n to D.  
>
> A mapping from its arguments to an element in the domain?

Doe using the word "arguments" somehow help you?  If so, it is unlikely
to lead to much trouble.

>> Formally
>> it's a subset of D^n x D with the important function property (that f(x)
>
> It is a mapping of D^n possible combinations of values for its n
> arguments each to a unique element of D, thus we lose the last x D.
> It is actually D^n x 1.

No.  Do you know what X x Y means in set theory?

>>> Now that I have dealt with open WFF, I know that
>>> Less_Than(x, y) and (x < y) specify sets of ordered pairs in ℕ.
>>
>> If the interpretation has domain ℕ and Less_Than is identified with the
>> usual less than relation, then yes, those formulas are satisfied by some
>> subset of ℕ x ℕ.
>>   
>>> Whereas Less_Than(3, 7) and (3 < 7) specify Boolean true.
>>
>> Are these formulas in the formal language?  Is 3 just shorthand for
>> S(S(S(0)))?  If so, then the usual interpretation will determine that
>> they are true.
>>
> Great.

But I note that you don't answer my questions.  I'm answering yours.

>>> If you specify the entire process as operations on finite strings then
>>> all the semantics is self-defined.
>>
>> Too vague and I don't want to spend time trying to find out what you
>> really mean.  I know how computable functions of string relate to
>> provability and truth and I don't think you can add to that
>> understanding.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence

<sigh>  Do you think I don't know about that?  Your comment was too
vague and I don't think it is worth trying to find out what you mean.

>>> Equal(Sum(2,5), 7) is transformed into the constant: TRUE.
>>
>> Stop writing formulas without saying what the language is.  Stop saying
>> what is or is not true without saying what interpretation you are
>> considering.
>
> The point that I am making is the it is possible to skip the whole
> interpretation step when all of the details of the algorithm are fully
> specified.

I'm not going to get sidetracked by your personal theories.  When (if)
you can learn how mathematicians use these words, you might be able to
state them in a way that can be understood.

>>>> Here's what I ask a student to do now to clear this up: Construct an
>>>> interpretation of PA (or Q which is simpler) such that the predicate <
>>>> (as usually defined) is interpreted to be >.
>>>>
>>>> If you do nothing else in reply to the post, do that.
>>>
>>> ∃x (Sy = x) // (x > y)
>>> ∃y (Sx = y) // (x < y)
>>
>> You've just read what an interpretation is in the book.  I asked for
>> one.  These are two formulas that seem to be attempts to define < and >.
>>
>> Can you specify a language for either Q or PA?  
>
> Successor is identical in each.

So, no, you can't?  It's the first step in answering my question, but I
think I asked way too much.  I suggest you don't try yet.

>>>>> 2.10 (b)(i) The set of the sum of two integers = 0
>>>>> (0,-1,-2...)(0,1,2...)
>>>> I see no set.  I see no pairs.  Again, I think you know the answer, but
>>>> you can't express it.  Try with the form of words above.
>>>
>>> The set of ordered pairs (x,y) such that (x + y = 0)
>>> (a) Every negative integer x and its absolute value
>>> (b) Every positive integer x and x * -1
>>> (c) 0, 0
>>
>> Yes.  I'd say the pairs <x, -x>.
>
> An integer is a whole number that can be either greater than 0, called
> positive, or less than 0, called negative. Zero is neither positive
> nor negative. ... Zero is called the origin, and it's neither negative
> nor positive. For every positive integer, there's a negative integer
> an equal distance from the origin.

That rather laboured answer suggests you disagree with my answer.  I
don't see why you disagree.

>>>>> 2.10 (c)(i) The domain is the set of all sets of integers, A^2_1(y,z) is
>>>>> y ⊆ z, f^1_1(y, z) is y ∩ z, and a1 is the empty set ∅.
>>>>>
>>>>> ⊆(y ∩ z, ∅)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, though it's much more common to write ⊆ using infix notation.
>>>
>>> I was writing it the way that it was specified.
>>
>> Then why not do that for the function and write ⊆(∩(y, z))?
>
> I use infix where I can.

Ah.  Did you not know you could write X ⊆ Y?  Reading a basic book about
set theory would really help.

-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-18 15:31 -0500
  Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-19 03:35 +0100
    Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 11:37 -0500
      Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 11:25 -0600
        Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 12:46 -0500
          Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 11:56 -0600
            Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 13:50 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 14:06 -0600
          Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-19 13:39 -0700
            Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 17:21 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-19 15:57 -0700
      Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-20 01:55 +0100
        Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-19 23:52 -0500
          Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-19 23:15 -0600
            Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 12:56 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-20 12:48 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-20 14:49 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 21:42 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 10:51 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 12:02 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 12:12 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 20:09 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 19:35 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-22 09:47 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-22 09:23 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-22 10:21 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-22 13:22 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 18:20 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-20 18:28 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 21:41 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-20 11:59 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 21:44 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-20 20:03 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 10:49 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 10:47 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 11:54 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 11:01 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 19:54 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-21 19:23 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-22 09:23 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-22 09:11 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-22 17:02 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-21 11:53 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-21 11:31 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-21 20:22 -0500
          Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-21 00:12 +0100
            Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-20 19:18 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-22 03:32 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-07-22 05:39 +0000
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-22 10:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-23 00:54 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-23 21:12 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-07-24 16:31 +0000
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 12:40 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-24 12:06 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 13:26 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 11:38 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 14:05 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 12:33 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 14:42 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-07-26 15:05 +0000
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-24 19:57 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 14:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-24 14:43 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 16:00 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 15:38 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 17:45 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 15:57 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 16:11 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 15:52 -0700
                Re: Simply defining G"odel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2020-07-24 19:02 +0000
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 10:27 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 10:36 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 10:39 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-24 20:20 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 14:37 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-25 00:13 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 19:25 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 12:02 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-24 23:49 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 18:49 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-25 02:28 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-24 22:18 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-24 21:58 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-25 01:46 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-25 10:31 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-25 12:04 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-25 14:45 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-26 00:51 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-25 22:46 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-26 12:10 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-25 22:53 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-26 20:46 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 16:42 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-26 15:46 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 22:46 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 00:28 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-26 17:05 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 02:52 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 00:30 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 00:33 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 22:39 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 14:12 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 12:23 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 23:41 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-27 17:37 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 19:08 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-27 19:57 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 21:14 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-27 20:45 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 21:55 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-27 22:58 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 00:07 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-27 23:16 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 00:38 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-28 00:05 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 10:00 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-28 21:32 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 22:44 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 02:01 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 20:45 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 03:11 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 21:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 03:24 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 21:44 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 17:33 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 11:40 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 11:46 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 22:58 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 17:13 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 00:51 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 21:05 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 12:04 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 12:42 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 20:24 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 15:38 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 01:31 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-30 10:29 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 17:45 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:55 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 17:50 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 11:57 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 20:30 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 14:38 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 22:52 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 17:09 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 01:00 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 21:29 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Alan Smaill <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> - 2020-07-29 15:47 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 13:20 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-29 12:13 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 15:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-29 14:43 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 22:37 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 18:34 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 02:01 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:34 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 01:48 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 10:58 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 21:24 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 15:33 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-02 00:24 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-02 09:51 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-02 17:29 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-03 09:41 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-03 17:39 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-08-02 18:04 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-08-01 23:19 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 16:33 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 13:31 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-29 12:02 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 14:57 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 22:47 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-29 15:33 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 20:50 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 18:51 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 02:38 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:36 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 00:47 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 01:30 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 12:55 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 10:45 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 20:28 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 15:10 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-02 00:11 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-02 09:43 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-02 17:20 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-03 09:39 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-03 17:46 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 00:28 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 23:31 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-29 16:43 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 14:02 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 00:36 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-29 21:44 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-29 21:50 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-29 21:55 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:48 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-31 12:45 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 14:55 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-31 13:13 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 16:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-31 14:42 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 18:16 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-31 14:44 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2020-07-31 14:02 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-31 17:58 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 22:33 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:43 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-30 13:39 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 10:51 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 00:58 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-01 10:52 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-01 21:02 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-02 09:28 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-02 17:45 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-03 09:46 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-08-03 17:46 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-08-03 13:22 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2020-07-30 20:35 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-30 12:57 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-30 17:20 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2020-07-30 23:24 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-30 16:30 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2020-07-31 01:31 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-30 20:36 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 00:12 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-30 20:41 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-30 17:10 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-30 16:31 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-30 20:50 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-30 20:40 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-31 01:34 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-28 10:41 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 12:51 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-07-28 08:23 +0000
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-28 09:20 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-26 13:00 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-26 22:45 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 16:17 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-27 23:51 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-26 22:46 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-27 17:14 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V33 (Mendelson Satisfiability) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-28 00:22 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 15:57 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-07-25 00:03 +0100
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-24 19:10 -0500

csiph-web