Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Converting formal proofs to sound deductive inference Version(7)
13 views
Skip to first unread message
peteolcott
Apr 30, 2019, 9:39:44 PM4/30/19
to
In sound deductive inference there is:
[a connected sequence of valid deductions from true premises to a true conclusion].
If we simply construe Axioms as expressions of language having the
semantic property of Boolean true this would anchor the syntax of
formal proofs to the semantics of Boolean values.
Now we have: [Deductively Sound Formal Proofs] ---- True(x) ↔ (⊢x)
[a connected sequence of inference from axioms to a true consequence].
AKA the universal truth predicate that Tarski "proved" could not exist.
Tarski Undefinability Proof
http://liarparadox.org/Tarski_Proof_275_276.pdf
--
Copyright 2019 Pete Olcott All rights reserved
"Great spirits have always encountered violent
opposition from mediocre minds." Albert Einstein
[a connected sequence of valid deductions from true premises to a true conclusion].
If we simply construe Axioms as expressions of language having the
semantic property of Boolean true this would anchor the syntax of
formal proofs to the semantics of Boolean values.
Now we have: [Deductively Sound Formal Proofs] ---- True(x) ↔ (⊢x)
[a connected sequence of inference from axioms to a true consequence].
AKA the universal truth predicate that Tarski "proved" could not exist.
Tarski Undefinability Proof
http://liarparadox.org/Tarski_Proof_275_276.pdf
--
Copyright 2019 Pete Olcott All rights reserved
"Great spirits have always encountered violent
opposition from mediocre minds." Albert Einstein
0 new messages