From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 1 6:39:51 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0E237B405 for ; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 06:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71ACB43E84 for ; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 06:39:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-b120.otenet.gr [195.167.121.248]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g81Ddc9M002965; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:39:40 +0300 (EEST) Received: from hades.hell.gr (hades [127.0.0.1]) by hades.hell.gr (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g81DdbHc017252; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:39:37 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g81DSZtg016998; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:28:35 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:28:35 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: David Schultz Cc: Terry Lambert , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Proofs, correctness, and other boring stuff (was: Why did evolution fail?) Message-ID: <20020901132835.GC16183@hades.hell.gr> References: <200208310608.g7V68h128080@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> <3D707754.1981EA36@mindspring.com> <20020831100938.GA262@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3D71D8E6.71248CEB@mindspring.com> <20020901120813.GA1227@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20020901120813.GA1227@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 2002-09-01 05:08 +0000, David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake Terry Lambert : > > We're not talking about correctness, here, we're talking about > > truth. 8-). > > So was Gödel. I'm not sure what you're trying to say---but can > you prove it? If I discussed the correctness of such a proof, > wouldn't that automatically make it wrong? No, it wouldn't. A correct proof, whose correctness is under discussion and doubted, can still be proven correct. Not by its very self, mind you, but by a meta-proof [repeat forever]. - Giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message