On 1/18/2025 4:44 PM, PGC wrote:
On Saturday, January 18, 2025 at 10:52:49 PM UTC+1 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 1/18/2025 2:29 AM, PGC wrote:
First I'll address the rest of your post as there's not really
much to talk about: Uncomputable inference rules (like the ω-rule)
aren’t used in standard physical theories much, so invoking them
misses the core point about Gödel’s incompleteness unless you have
some incredible non-standard result to show; in which case,
prove/show it. Again, we can simulate a finite system for N time
steps, but Gödel’s result is not about whether you can brute-force
a finite trajectory—it’s about the existence of statements in a
sufficiently strong formal framework (one that encodes arithmetic)
which no consistent axiom system can decide.
Sufficiently strong means being able to construct self-referential
language in the system so that "This proposition is unprovable."
is a proposition of the system. Which isn't very interesting.
Right. It follows that what you've mainly been doing for the last 2
decades or so on this list isn't - your words - "very interesting".
It might have gotten interesting when you crossed paths with people
who tend towards the same. Perhaps the difference is that they had no
hidden ambitions to win; no ties to imagery of themselves as big deals
of an email list or otherwise... or tying their names to conventional
interpretations with a tiny twist, and celebrating their own
originality for compensation of the lack thereof.
Perhaps the dogmatic application of the predicate "win via poking
holes" to the topic "scientific curiosity regarding Theories of
Everything" was rather too doubt ridden to be Gödelian in spirit (as
Gödel had a feel/sensitivity for when to stop such that good faith
could at times be applied)... and therefore quite - dang I forgot the
word - no matter. If it mattered however, it would be rigid, rather
like matter and never collapse.
Purely unprovable sets of propositions like this are perhaps separate
questions or... to you "a different matter or dust to which we return
very much" and thankfully can be dismissed as such.
I would tend to agree, also quite unprovably, with your other
statement too: allow one contradiction or troll => allow them all...
and be their king, hold court, and claim that a thing be a thing .
Moderation? Who cares in a world where lies give you wing and the
trolls solo sing? Post away and teach them too. They need it as much
as you.
You have a way with words. Lots and lots of words.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/620efe33-fdb4-444e-aa85-fcc1dd45e9cc%40gmail.com.
