There is no loophole in the halting problem. The arrow of time/entropy is your master.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 12:29 am There is a loophole in the halting problem proofs that no one ever noticed before.
Whether or not a universal halt decider can be created does not actually depend
on deciding whether the Liar Paradox is true or false.
Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
Re: Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
-
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
You mistake your own ignorance for the non existence of knowledge. There is a loophole.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:56 pmThere is no loophole in the halting problem. The arrow of time/entropy is your master.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 12:29 am There is a loophole in the halting problem proofs that no one ever noticed before.
Whether or not a universal halt decider can be created does not actually depend
on deciding whether the Liar Paradox is true or false.
Your next sentence is gibberish.
Re: Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
I recognise my ignorance for what it is. You mistake your ignorance for knowledge.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:54 pm You mistake your own ignorance for the non existence of knowledge. There is a loophole.
It's only physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time
-
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
Physics has nothing to do with semantic logical entailment.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:21 pmI recognise my ignorance as ignorance. You mistake your ignorance for knowledge...PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:54 pm You mistake your own ignorance for the non existence of knowledge. There is a loophole.
It's only physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time
The first is purely empirical and the second is purely analytical.
Re: Formalizing Natural Language Semantics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Dogma ... ircularityPeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:24 pm Physics has nothing to do with semantic logical entailment.
The first is purely empirical and the second is purely analytical.
All of analyticity is colourless reductionism. It reduces to meaninglessness, not semantic truth.