Making sure to ignore what I say is not an actual rebuttalSkepdick wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:01 pmEven God can't help this level of idiocy.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:55 pm Axiom(x) → ~Provable(x) It like saying I have a cup of water therefore my cup is empty.
If "I have a cup of water" is an axiom it follows that "I have a cup of water" is not provable.
It's called non-provable because it doesn't appears on the right-hand side of the therefore.
??? therefore I have a cup of water.
Semantic Necessity operator: ⊨□
"I have a cup of water" ⊨□ "I have a cup of water" // thus provable