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

Groups > comp.theory > #134999

Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence

From Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups comp.theory
Subject Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence
Date 2025-11-04 11:56 +0200
Organization -
Message-ID <10ecik1$3i3eb$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (25 earlier) <10e29hu$fab7$2@dont-email.me> <10e4j9e$1552i$1@dont-email.me> <10e53e1$1a4tm$3@dont-email.me> <10e7jpl$23jkb$1@dont-email.me> <10ebern$38k94$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2025-11-03 23:45:57 +0000, olcott said:

> On 11/2/2025 6:45 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-11-01 13:54:09 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 11/1/2025 4:18 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-10-31 12:20:13 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/31/2025 6:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-10-30 13:03:23 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10/30/2025 5:50 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-29 16:25:00 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 10/29/2025 5:45 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-28 15:12:29 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/2025 4:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-28 01:22:21 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/27/25 5:45 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-26 17:57:16 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/26/25 7:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-25 19:57:19 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/25/2025 6:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-24 17:37:43 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/24/2025 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-23 15:39:13 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 5:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-22 12:39:31 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/22/2025 4:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-21 15:11:19 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/21/2025 4:31 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-20 16:24:46 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 3:55 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-19 15:03:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/19/2025 3:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-18 10:58:15 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/18/2025 4:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not a sense of "proof".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the correct way to do a proof.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A way to do is not a sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The conventional way to do proofs concludes that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> within its rules if the Moon is made from green
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cheese and the Moon is not made from green cheese
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this proves that Donald Trump is the Lord and savior Jesus Christ.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, and the empirical falct that nobody has verified all of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. the Moon is made from green cheese
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. the Moon is not made from grenn cheese
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Donald Trump is not the Lord and saviour Jesus Christ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at the same time supports the idea that the conventiona wya to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do proofs is correct and trustworthy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When we require that correct reasoning is only semantic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logical entailment from basic facts the Principle of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Explosion ceases to exist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only if you exclude from "correct reasioning" some reasning that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually is correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no counter-example that can possibly exist
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that can show there are any gaps in the body of human
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge that can be expressed in language that begins
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with a consistent set of basic facts and only applies
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> semantic logical entailment to these facts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no language that begins with a consistent set of basic facts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and only applies semantic logical entailment to those facts and can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> express all of human knowledge without any gaps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A subset of formalized English does do this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody has ever presented such subset.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ChatGPT rewords my words into that subset.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your words have much less material than all human knowledge without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any gaps. Therefore it is impossible to verify that you have told
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every necessary word to it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Categorically exhaustive reasoning reverse-engineers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the required architecture of the system. Wittgenstein
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did this on Gödel https://www.liarparadox.org/ Wittgenstein.pdf
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and he was so succinct eliminate the convoluted mess of Gödel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers that people mistook his succinct analysis as simplistic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not understanding what Gödel was really saying.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, an expectable consequence of ignoring essential aspects is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not understanding.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gödel numbers are merely the ridiculously convoluted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way that Gödel added the functionality of this simple
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operator: ⊢ to a formal language woefully too inexpressive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Natural numbers are one of the best understood topics of mathematics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore restricting the assumptions to natural numbers provdes the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis for the most interesting result.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course one can ask whether one can prove a similar theorem about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite strings. It is much simpler to express claims and proofs as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fimite strings as thats how they are usually expressed anyway. But
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that requires that one first constructs a theory of finite strings.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But we can show a direct one-to-one mapping of finite strings in a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite alphabet to natural numbers (it just becomes the notational base 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the numbers).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's true, and I would prefer that rather than Gödel's mapping. But
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the proof of Gödel's theorem is simpler if the number of symbols in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the alphabet is prime even if that would mean that some of the symbols
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are unused.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godel's Theorem doesn't need the number of symbols to be prime, it uses 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> prime numbers to number the symbols, and prime powers for the position.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> And consequently Gödel's example of an undecidable formula is more complex
>>>>>>>>>>>> than needed. Which doesn't really matter as the complex details can be
>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden behind definitions.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own 
>>>>>>>>>>> unprovability. 15 ...
>>>>>>>>>>> (Gödel 1931:40-41)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> G := (F ⊬ G) // Olcott's Minimal Type Theory
>>>>>>>>>>> https://philarchive.org/archive/PETMTT-4v2 // YACC BNF of MTT
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ?- G = not(provable(F, G)).
>>>>>>>>>>> G = not(provable(F, G)).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(G, not(provable(F, G))).
>>>>>>>>>>> false.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And 
>>>>>>>>>>> Related Systems
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Nice to see that you don't disagree.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> In other words you agree that I proved 1931 Incompleteness is incorrect.
>>>>>>>>> Gödel's G when boiled down to its barest essence is simply semantically
>>>>>>>>> unsound the same way the Liar Paradox is unsound.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> As yousually your "in other words" is a lie. Existence of a simpler proof
>>>>>>>> does not make the original one incorrect.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My words are true within your words:
>>>>>>>    "Nice to see that you don't disagree."
>>>>>>> If you didn't mean that then you should not have said that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I did not say nor mean "you did not disagree with anything". The usual
>>>>>> meaning of what I said is that you don't disagree with what I said in
>>>>>> my previous message about the complexity of Gödel's sentence.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The complexity of Gödel's sentence is nuts.
>>>>> G := (F ⊬ G) Just detect the cycle in this
>>>>> and Gödel is refuted.
>>>> 
>>>> Nice to see that you still don't disagree with my comment about the
>>>> complexity of Gödel's sentence.
>>> 
>>> Yet I absolutely do disagree.
>> 
>> OK, you think Gödel's numbering scheme is simple.
> 
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own 
> unprovability. 15 ... (Gödel 1931:40-41)
> 
> It totally hides the details that proof his theorem is unsound.

You have never revealed any unsound detail of the proof, not even
whether it uses a false premise or an invalid inference.

-- 
Mikko

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

Thread

The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 19:37 -0500
  Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 19:21 -0700
    Re: The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 21:26 -0500
      Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 19:31 -0700
        Re: The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 21:48 -0500
          Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 19:55 -0700
            Re: The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 22:02 -0500
              Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 20:10 -0700
                Re: The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 22:17 -0500
                Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 20:54 -0700
                Re: The halting problem breaks with reality olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 23:37 -0500
                Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 22:45 -0700
                Re: The halting problem breaks with reality dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-13 22:52 -0700
          Re: The halting problem breaks with reality Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-14 18:12 +0000
  Re: The halting problem breaks with reality Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-14 12:53 +0300
    Re: The halting problem breaks with reality --- confirmed olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-14 11:29 -0500
      Re: The halting problem breaks with reality --- confirmed Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-15 11:49 +0300
        Re: The halting problem breaks with reality --- confirmed olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 07:21 -0500
          Re: The halting problem breaks with reality --- confirmed Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-16 11:38 +0300
            The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 08:57 -0500
              Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 14:07 -0700
              Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-17 11:32 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-17 10:06 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-18 12:30 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-18 05:58 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-19 11:44 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-19 10:03 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-19 12:55 -0700
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-20 11:55 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 11:24 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-21 12:31 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-21 10:11 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-21 13:38 -0700
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-21 22:13 +0000
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-21 20:46 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-22 12:23 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 07:39 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-23 13:02 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 10:39 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 11:57 -0700
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-24 10:48 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-24 12:41 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-25 14:57 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-25 14:53 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-25 13:03 -0700
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-26 13:34 +0200
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-25 11:24 -0700
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-24 10:46 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-24 12:37 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-25 14:59 +0300
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-25 14:57 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-25 21:27 -0400
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-26 13:44 +0200
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-26 13:57 -0400
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-27 11:45 +0200
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 08:56 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-27 17:15 +0000
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 12:22 -0500
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-27 18:54 +0000
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-27 21:26 -0400
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-28 11:54 +0200
                Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 10:07 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 21:57 -0400
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-29 12:43 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 11:22 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:47 -0700
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-30 12:37 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 07:54 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-31 13:02 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 07:09 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-01 11:10 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 08:50 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-02 14:41 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 17:40 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-04 00:29 +0000
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 18:32 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 01:59 +0000
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-04 11:51 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 11:45 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-05 12:46 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 05:55 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-06 10:35 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 05:03 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-07 10:14 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-07 07:00 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-08 10:34 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-08 07:47 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-09 12:19 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-04 11:46 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 10:29 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-05 12:47 +0200
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-27 21:22 -0400
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-28 11:58 +0200
                Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 10:12 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 21:57 -0400
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-29 12:53 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 11:26 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 21:46 -0400
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-30 12:44 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 08:01 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-31 13:10 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 07:18 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-01 11:16 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 08:52 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-02 14:43 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 17:41 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-04 11:53 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-29 12:45 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 11:25 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:46 -0700
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-30 12:50 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 08:03 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-31 13:15 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 07:20 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-01 11:18 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 08:54 -0500
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-02 14:45 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 17:45 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-04 11:56 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 12:05 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-05 12:49 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 05:52 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-06 10:39 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 05:08 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-07 10:21 +0200
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-07 07:31 -0600
                Re: Gödel's G := (F ⊬ G) specifies a cycle in the directed graph of its evaluation sequence Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-08 10:37 +0200
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 21:57 -0400
                Re: The Halting Problem is Incoherent Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-29 12:56 +0200
  Re: The halting problem breaks with reality Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-14 18:09 +0000
  Re: The halting problem breaks with reality Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-17 12:13 -0400

csiph-web