• Computing truth values from finite strings

    From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 16:15:51 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br>

    My 28 year goal has been to make <br>
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br>
    reliably computable.<br><br>

    This required establishing a new foundation<br>

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@Richard@Damon-Family.org to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 17:40:44 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:
    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.

    Nope.

    How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:

    All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.


    That statement, or its inverse MUST be true, but hasn't been able to be computed.

    All you are doing is repeating the errors of Early Hilbert, because you
    failed to learn form history, so are repeating ancient errors.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 16:59:49 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    On 1/3/2026 4:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:
    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.

    Nope.

    How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:

    All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.


    That is not a member of the body of knowledge.
    My system only applies to the body of knowledge.


    That statement, or its inverse MUST be true, but hasn't been able to be computed.

    All you are doing is repeating the errors of Early Hilbert, because you failed to learn form history, so are repeating ancient errors.

    Not at all. I added your objections to my full system.
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br>

    My 28 year goal has been to make <br>
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br>
    reliably computable.<br><br>

    This required establishing a new foundation<br>
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@Richard@Damon-Family.org to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 20:43:46 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    On 1/3/26 7:14 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 6:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:59 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 4:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:
    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.

    Nope.

    How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:

    All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.


    That is not a member of the body of knowledge.
    My system only applies to the body of knowledge.

    And thus is admittedly, not a logic system, which is about a body of
    truths derived from axioms and rules.

    In fact, you system can never learn anything new, as that wasn't part
    of that body, so isn't allowed.

    So, all you are doing is admitting you have been on a wrong track for
    decades, you you were never actually looking at logic systems.


    We are probably already too late and the world
    will be killed by climate change hired liars.

    My system could have prevented that but having
    trollish fun carried more weight than preventing
    the end of life an Earth.

    Nope, your system of lies is what you say is causing the problem.

    Your problem is you don't understand what truth actually is.

    This is shown just by the fact that you beleive the LLMs you talk with.




    That statement, or its inverse MUST be true, but hasn't been able to
    be computed.

    All you are doing is repeating the errors of Early Hilbert, because
    you failed to learn form history, so are repeating ancient errors.

    Not at all. I added your objections to my full system.





    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 19:51:43 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    On 1/3/2026 7:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 7:14 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 6:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:59 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 4:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:
    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.

    Nope.

    How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:

    All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.


    That is not a member of the body of knowledge.
    My system only applies to the body of knowledge.

    And thus is admittedly, not a logic system, which is about a body of
    truths derived from axioms and rules.

    In fact, you system can never learn anything new, as that wasn't part
    of that body, so isn't allowed.

    So, all you are doing is admitting you have been on a wrong track for
    decades, you you were never actually looking at logic systems.


    We are probably already too late and the world
    will be killed by climate change hired liars.

    My system could have prevented that but having
    trollish fun carried more weight than preventing
    the end of life an Earth.

    Nope, your system of lies is what you say is causing the problem.

    Your problem is you don't understand what truth actually is.

    This is shown just by the fact that you beleive the LLMs you talk with.


    Do you understand the correct semantic entailment
    on the basis of expressions of language that are
    stipulated to be true derives conclusions that are
    necessarily true?




    That statement, or its inverse MUST be true, but hasn't been able
    to be computed.

    All you are doing is repeating the errors of Early Hilbert, because >>>>> you failed to learn form history, so are repeating ancient errors.

    Not at all. I added your objections to my full system.





    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br>

    My 28 year goal has been to make <br>
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br>
    reliably computable.<br><br>

    This required establishing a new foundation<br>
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@Richard@Damon-Family.org to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Jan 3 21:28:59 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.math

    On 1/3/26 8:51 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 7:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 7:14 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 6:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:59 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 1/3/2026 4:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 1/3/26 5:15 PM, olcott wrote:
    All deciders essentially: Transform finite string
    inputs by finite string transformation rules into
    {Accept, Reject} values.

    Thus making
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    inherently computable.

    Nope.

    How does that answer the question of the truth of the statement:

    All Even Number greater than 2 are the sum of two primes.


    That is not a member of the body of knowledge.
    My system only applies to the body of knowledge.

    And thus is admittedly, not a logic system, which is about a body of
    truths derived from axioms and rules.

    In fact, you system can never learn anything new, as that wasn't
    part of that body, so isn't allowed.

    So, all you are doing is admitting you have been on a wrong track
    for decades, you you were never actually looking at logic systems.


    We are probably already too late and the world
    will be killed by climate change hired liars.

    My system could have prevented that but having
    trollish fun carried more weight than preventing
    the end of life an Earth.

    Nope, your system of lies is what you say is causing the problem.

    Your problem is you don't understand what truth actually is.

    This is shown just by the fact that you beleive the LLMs you talk with.


    Do you understand the correct semantic entailment
    on the basis of expressions of language that are
    stipulated to be true derives conclusions that are
    necessarily true?

    But that doesn't DEFINE what truth is, only a way to find some truths.

    All you are doing is showing you don't understand the problem.





    That statement, or its inverse MUST be true, but hasn't been able >>>>>> to be computed.

    All you are doing is repeating the errors of Early Hilbert,
    because you failed to learn form history, so are repeating ancient >>>>>> errors.

    Not at all. I added your objections to my full system.








    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2