Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 17:00:19 -0700 From: David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.berkeley.edu> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proofs, correctness, and other boring stuff (was: Why did evolution fail?) Message-ID: <20020902000019.GA486@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <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> <20020901132835.GC16183@hades.hell.gr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>: > On 2002-09-01 05:08 +0000, David Schultz wrote: > > Thus spake Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>: > > > 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]. It was supposed to be a joke. (You don't think I would get involved in this thread in any kind of serious way, do you?) If Terry offers a proof that ``we're not talking about correctness'', and I question the correctness of his proof, then the proposition is false. -- A zero-sum game is one where either I win or you lose. --Allison Coates, 2002-04-29 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020902000019.GA486>