Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #10257 > unrolled thread

Everything I say is false.

Started bymikegonta@gmail.com
First post2019-10-09 12:10 -0700
Last post2021-01-22 15:21 -0800
Articles 9 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  Everything I say is false. mikegonta@gmail.com - 2019-10-09 12:10 -0700
    Re: Everything I say is false. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-10-10 14:42 +0100
      Re: Everything I say is false. Louis Valence <lvalence@example.com> - 2019-10-11 10:20 -0300
        Re: Everything I say is false. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-10-11 18:38 +0100
          Re: Everything I say is false. Louis Valence <lvalence@example.com> - 2019-10-14 11:40 -0300
            Re: Everything I say is false. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-10-30 00:40 -0700
              Re: Everything I say is false. Louis Valence <lvalence@example.com> - 2019-10-30 16:26 -0300
                Re: Everything I say is false. Louis Valence <lvalence@example.com> - 2019-10-30 21:32 -0300
    Re: Everything I say is false. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-22 15:21 -0800

#10257 — Everything I say is false.

Frommikegonta@gmail.com
Date2019-10-09 12:10 -0700
SubjectEverything I say is false.
Message-ID<e9a6d672-00b0-4ddf-825e-341771fed6eb@googlegroups.com>
Everything I say is false. 
https://mikegonta.com/the-ideom/Everything%20I%20say%20is%20false.html

_________________
Mike Gonta
look and see - many look but few see

https://mikegonta.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#10258

FromRichard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Date2019-10-10 14:42 +0100
Message-ID<qnncfr$qm8$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#10257
On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
> Everything I say is false.

That's not true.

But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10259

FromLouis Valence <lvalence@example.com>
Date2019-10-11 10:20 -0300
Message-ID<86v9svmn9m.fsf@example.com>
In reply to#10258
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
>> Everything I say is false.
>
> That's not true.
>
> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.

Fun with logic. :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10260

FromRichard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Date2019-10-11 18:38 +0100
Message-ID<qnqenj$1je$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#10259
On 11/10/2019 14:20, Louis Valence wrote:
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
> 
>> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Everything I say is false.
>>
>> That's not true.
>>
>> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.
> 
> Fun with logic. :-)

Indeed. Here's an age-worn and very familiar paradox (bear with me here):

Side A:
+------------------------------+
+ The sentence on the other    +
+ side of this card is true.   +
+------------------------------+

Side B:
+------------------------------+
+ The sentence on the other    +
+ side of this card is false.  +
+------------------------------+

If you now turn the card on its side and inspect the edge with a 
powerful microscope, you will see the following words, carved in carbon 
atoms individually arranged by people with far too much time and 
equipment on their hands:

+------------------------------+
+ Everything written on Side A +
+ and Side B is bloody stupid. +
+------------------------------+

Paradox resolved!

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10263

FromLouis Valence <lvalence@example.com>
Date2019-10-14 11:40 -0300
Message-ID<865zkrcrvh.fsf@example.com>
In reply to#10260
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> On 11/10/2019 14:20, Louis Valence wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>
>>> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Everything I say is false.
>>>
>>> That's not true.
>>>
>>> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.
>>
>> Fun with logic. :-)
>
> Indeed. Here's an age-worn and very familiar paradox (bear with me here):
>
> Side A:
> +------------------------------+
> + The sentence on the other    +
> + side of this card is true.   +
> +------------------------------+
>
> Side B:
> +------------------------------+
> + The sentence on the other    +
> + side of this card is false.  +
> +------------------------------+
>
> If you now turn the card on its side and inspect the edge with a
> powerful microscope, you will see the following words, carved in
> carbon atoms individually arranged by people with far too much time
> and equipment on their hands:
>
> +------------------------------+
> + Everything written on Side A +
> + and Side B is bloody stupid. +
> +------------------------------+
>
> Paradox resolved!

I'm slow, so bear with me.  Either A is true or false.  Assume it's
true.  Then B must be true.  But if B is true, A cannot be true.  Okay.
Then assume A is false.  Then B must be false.  If B is false, then A
must be true.  Contradiction.  So we can't satisfy both statements
together with either truth-value.  Alright.  I see it.

Here's perhaps my favorite version!

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
What is the probability that you'll randomly answer this question and
get it right?  Check all answers that apply.

(a) 25% (b) 50% (c) 60% (d) 25%
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I think this one is really interesting.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10273

FromÖö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee>
Date2019-10-30 00:40 -0700
Message-ID<0ed80226-a4b8-4fcd-b84b-bc1418608ddb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#10263
On Monday, 14 October 2019 17:40:38 UTC+3, Louis Valence  wrote:
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
> 
> > On 11/10/2019 14:20, Louis Valence wrote:
> >> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Everything I say is false.
> >>>
> >>> That's not true.
> >>>
> >>> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.
> >>
> >> Fun with logic. :-)
> >
> > Indeed. Here's an age-worn and very familiar paradox (bear with me here):
> >
> > Side A:
> > +------------------------------+
> > + The sentence on the other    +
> > + side of this card is true.   +
> > +------------------------------+
> >
> > Side B:
> > +------------------------------+
> > + The sentence on the other    +
> > + side of this card is false.  +
> > +------------------------------+
> >
> > If you now turn the card on its side and inspect the edge with a
> > powerful microscope, you will see the following words, carved in
> > carbon atoms individually arranged by people with far too much time
> > and equipment on their hands:
> >
> > +------------------------------+
> > + Everything written on Side A +
> > + and Side B is bloody stupid. +
> > +------------------------------+
> >
> > Paradox resolved!
> 
> I'm slow, so bear with me.  Either A is true or false.  Assume it's
> true.  Then B must be true.  But if B is true, A cannot be true.  Okay.
> Then assume A is false.  Then B must be false.  If B is false, then A
> must be true.  Contradiction.  So we can't satisfy both statements
> together with either truth-value.  Alright.  I see it.
> 
> Here's perhaps my favorite version!
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> What is the probability that you'll randomly answer this question and
> get it right?  Check all answers that apply.
> 
> (a) 25% (b) 50% (c) 60% (d) 25%
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> I think this one is really interesting.

Since there are 16 different ways to check these
answers randomly and only checking none is correct
the probability is 6.25%.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10274

FromLouis Valence <lvalence@example.com>
Date2019-10-30 16:26 -0300
Message-ID<86k18mc9vs.fsf@example.com>
In reply to#10273
Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:

> On Monday, 14 October 2019 17:40:38 UTC+3, Louis Valence  wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>> 
>> > On 11/10/2019 14:20, Louis Valence wrote:
>> >> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>> >>
>> >>> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>>> Everything I say is false.
>> >>>
>> >>> That's not true.
>> >>>
>> >>> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.
>> >>
>> >> Fun with logic. :-)
>> >
>> > Indeed. Here's an age-worn and very familiar paradox (bear with me here):
>> >
>> > Side A:
>> > +------------------------------+
>> > + The sentence on the other    +
>> > + side of this card is true.   +
>> > +------------------------------+
>> >
>> > Side B:
>> > +------------------------------+
>> > + The sentence on the other    +
>> > + side of this card is false.  +
>> > +------------------------------+
>> >
>> > If you now turn the card on its side and inspect the edge with a
>> > powerful microscope, you will see the following words, carved in
>> > carbon atoms individually arranged by people with far too much time
>> > and equipment on their hands:
>> >
>> > +------------------------------+
>> > + Everything written on Side A +
>> > + and Side B is bloody stupid. +
>> > +------------------------------+
>> >
>> > Paradox resolved!
>> 
>> I'm slow, so bear with me.  Either A is true or false.  Assume it's
>> true.  Then B must be true.  But if B is true, A cannot be true.  Okay.
>> Then assume A is false.  Then B must be false.  If B is false, then A
>> must be true.  Contradiction.  So we can't satisfy both statements
>> together with either truth-value.  Alright.  I see it.
>> 
>> Here's perhaps my favorite version!
>> 
>> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
>> What is the probability that you'll randomly answer this question and
>> get it right?  Check all answers that apply.
>> 
>> (a) 25% (b) 50% (c) 60% (d) 25%
>> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>> 
>> I think this one is really interesting.
>
> Since there are 16 different ways to check these
> answers randomly and only checking none is correct
> the probability is 6.25%.

Cool.  You didn't assume you should check only a single answer.  You're
saying the question should be left blank.  I think you're correct.  It
is not, then, another case of Russell's Paradox.  Well done!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10275

FromLouis Valence <lvalence@example.com>
Date2019-10-30 21:32 -0300
Message-ID<86bltxdabd.fsf@example.com>
In reply to#10274
Louis Valence <lvalence@example.com> writes:

> Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:
>
>> On Monday, 14 October 2019 17:40:38 UTC+3, Louis Valence  wrote:
>>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>> 
>>> > On 11/10/2019 14:20, Louis Valence wrote:
>>> >> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 09/10/2019 20:10, mikegonta@gmail.com wrote:
>>> >>>> Everything I say is false.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> That's not true.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> But *some* things you say are false, and the above is an example.
>>> >>
>>> >> Fun with logic. :-)
>>> >
>>> > Indeed. Here's an age-worn and very familiar paradox (bear with me here):
>>> >
>>> > Side A:
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> > + The sentence on the other    +
>>> > + side of this card is true.   +
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> >
>>> > Side B:
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> > + The sentence on the other    +
>>> > + side of this card is false.  +
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> >
>>> > If you now turn the card on its side and inspect the edge with a
>>> > powerful microscope, you will see the following words, carved in
>>> > carbon atoms individually arranged by people with far too much time
>>> > and equipment on their hands:
>>> >
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> > + Everything written on Side A +
>>> > + and Side B is bloody stupid. +
>>> > +------------------------------+
>>> >
>>> > Paradox resolved!
>>> 
>>> I'm slow, so bear with me.  Either A is true or false.  Assume it's
>>> true.  Then B must be true.  But if B is true, A cannot be true.  Okay.
>>> Then assume A is false.  Then B must be false.  If B is false, then A
>>> must be true.  Contradiction.  So we can't satisfy both statements
>>> together with either truth-value.  Alright.  I see it.
>>> 
>>> Here's perhaps my favorite version!
>>> 
>>> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
>>> What is the probability that you'll randomly answer this question and
>>> get it right?  Check all answers that apply.
>>> 
>>> (a) 25% (b) 50% (c) 60% (d) 25%
>>> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>>> 
>>> I think this one is really interesting.
>>
>> Since there are 16 different ways to check these
>> answers randomly and only checking none is correct
>> the probability is 6.25%.
>
> Cool.  You didn't assume you should check only a single answer.  You're
> saying the question should be left blank.  I think you're correct.  It
> is not, then, another case of Russell's Paradox.  Well done!

I've been distracted!  The question says ``check all that apply''.
Anyhow, well done!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11929

FromH E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com>
Date2021-01-22 15:21 -0800
Message-ID<e019b4ac-0af5-425f-8423-9610bd4853f8n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#10257
mike...@gmail.com kirjutas kolmapäev, 9. oktoober 2019 kl 22:10:26 UTC+3:
> Everything I say is false. 
> https://mikegonta.com/the-ideom/Everything%20I%20say%20is%20false.html 
> 
> _________________ 
> Mike Gonta 
> look and see - many look but few see 
> 
> https://mikegonta.com

Something should have been right, because otherwise it would be impossible, that You would have written this post.


Kr.

372 6861327
ya12983 mail co m

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web