• Re: on what in the fuck is going on there godel-bros ???

    From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 10:18:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and puke
    over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale of 10.
    Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure and deviant religious Hindu
    sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of acting out
    often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to
    passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in people
    and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go berserk
    with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of the negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for feeling
    free and liberated.

    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens for a reason.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mild Shock@janburse@fastmail.fm to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory on Fri Dec 5 20:01:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    Hi,

    I always admired the French Teaching of Logic.
    This silly Philosophy Professor scolded me a couple
    of times with this nonsense, playing dumb and deaf,

    like a complete idiot:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize. https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78

    Still his prover demonstrates LEM from RAA:

    ?-prove((a | ~a)).
    \begin{prooftree}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot \lnot A$}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot A$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \to E $}}
    \BinaryInfC{$\bot$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ IP $} 1}
    \UnaryInfC{$A \lor \lnot A$}
    \end{prooftree} https://g4-mic.vidal-rosset.net/wasm/tinker#prove((a%20%7C%20~a)).

    Please note that RAA = IP, synonymous names.
    Reductio Ad Absurdum and Indirect Proof.

    LoL

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    In the coming age of analog computing,
    symbolic logic means nothing:

    “The high data-rate sense perception and
    identification abilities of the human system
    mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We
     are generally conscious of a cognitive
    recognition after the fact. In this way, what
    we understand as consciousness has to be
    identified as a reflexive monitoring ability
    with quite limited application. To produce
    consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we
    are stepping down, not up.”
    ― Frank Herbert, Destination: Void

    Bye


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 13:08:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 12:18 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-
    induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and puke over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale of 10.
    Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure and deviant religious Hindu sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of acting out
    often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in people
    and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go berserk
    with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of the negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for feeling
    free and liberated.


    What you are saying seems anchored in duality https://endless-satsang.com/advaita-nonduality-oneness

    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens for a reason.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mild Shock@janburse@fastmail.fm to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory on Fri Dec 5 20:10:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    Hi,

    The episode told me everything about the Character
    of the silly Philosophy Professor:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize.

    https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78

    There were similar episodes, on the SWI-Prolog discourse
    forum. In the same style. So there is no loss that I cannot

    post anymore on SWI-Prolog discourse. But please:

    **NEVER EVER CITE ME IN YOUR WORK**

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I always admired the French Teaching of Logic.
    This silly Philosophy Professor scolded me a couple
    of times with this nonsense, playing dumb and deaf,

    like a complete idiot:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize. https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78


    Still his prover demonstrates LEM from RAA:

    ?-prove((a | ~a)).
    \begin{prooftree}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot  \lnot A$}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot A$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \to E $}}
    \BinaryInfC{$\bot$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ IP $}  1}
    \UnaryInfC{$A \lor  \lnot A$}
    \end{prooftree} https://g4-mic.vidal-rosset.net/wasm/tinker#prove((a%20%7C%20~a)).

    Please note that RAA = IP, synonymous names.
    Reductio Ad Absurdum and Indirect Proof.

    LoL

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    In the coming age of analog computing,
    symbolic logic means nothing:

    “The high data-rate sense perception and
    identification abilities of the human system
    mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We
      are generally conscious of a cognitive
    recognition after the fact. In this way, what
    we understand as consciousness has to be
    identified as a reflexive monitoring ability
    with quite limited application. To produce
    consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we
    are stepping down, not up.”
    ― Frank Herbert, Destination: Void

    Bye



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 11:33:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/4/2025 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio

    Do I know you? Apparently, we are on the same path!

    Uncontrolled Swearing in public is not the only symptom of Tourette
    Syndrome:

    Whistling.
    Sniffing.
    Barking
    Hearing disembodied voices
    Incessantly repeating a sound, word or phrase, even when not doing yoga meditation or zen.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 12:14:34 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 11:08 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 12:18 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-
    induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and
    puke over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale of
    10. Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure and deviant religious
    Hindu sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of acting
    out often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video
    taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and
    individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to
    passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in
    people and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go
    berserk with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of the
    negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for feeling
    free and liberated.


    What you are saying seems anchored in duality https://endless-satsang.com/advaita-nonduality-oneness

    Apparently there are no true materialists on this list.

    My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists, is
    that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness
    itself is the ultimate reality.

    Because without consciousness, we would not exist.

    This is the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.

    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens for
    a reason.






    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 15:29:03 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 2:14 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 11:08 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 12:18 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-
    induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and
    puke over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale
    of 10. Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure and deviant religious
    Hindu sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of acting
    out often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video
    taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and
    individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to
    passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in
    people and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go
    berserk with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of
    the negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for
    feeling free and liberated.


    What you are saying seems anchored in duality
    https://endless-satsang.com/advaita-nonduality-oneness

    Apparently there are no true materialists on this list.

    My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists, is
    that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness
    itself is the ultimate reality.

    Because without consciousness, we would not exist.


    That too is duality.

    This is the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.

    Mind Only and No Mind are one-and-the-same thing.


    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens for
    a reason.






    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 14:22:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/3/2025 9:34 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 11:23 AM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 8:50 AM, dart200 wrote:
    nah ur just willfully ignoring ur bullshit:

    To the guy that invented the zero: thanks for nothing.

    You are starting to sound paranoid. Are you heading into a mid-life
    crises? If you think you are, there may be help for you.

    Obviously it's a mental condition: Sleepless nights. Nerves. Sudden
    outbursts, cursing at inanimate objects. Grouchy. Calling out
    strangers in chat rooms. Diminished appetite, except for spicy foods.


    You are staring to sound like a hateful bastard
    that will be eventually condemned to actual Hell
    (if such a place exists).

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 16:26:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 9:34 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 11:23 AM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 8:50 AM, dart200 wrote:
    nah ur just willfully ignoring ur bullshit:

    To the guy that invented the zero: thanks for nothing.

    You are starting to sound paranoid. Are you heading into a mid-life
    crises? If you think you are, there may be help for you.

    Obviously it's a mental condition: Sleepless nights. Nerves. Sudden
    outbursts, cursing at inanimate objects. Grouchy. Calling out
    strangers in chat rooms. Diminished appetite, except for spicy foods.


    You are staring to sound like a hateful bastard
    that will be eventually condemned to actual Hell
    (if such a place exists).

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.


    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 17:51:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 19:57:08 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From dart200@user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 22:20:08 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/25 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.


    dude, do i really need to choose between dualism and non-dualism???

    both perspectives have their place it's not actually a contradiction

    we are all god is all of us

    eh????
    --
    hi, i'm nick! let's end war 🙃

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From dart200@user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Fri Dec 5 22:27:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/25 12:14 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 11:08 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 12:18 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-
    induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and
    puke over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale
    of 10. Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure

    i, however, take no sides and give no quarter

    and deviant religious

    be "deviant" u mean sex??? like the ancient indian figurines with the
    nice boobies? horny ass mf figured out boob jobs would exist millennia
    before we could do them... nice

    Hindu sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of acting
    out often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video
    taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and
    individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to
    passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in
    people and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go
    berserk with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of
    the negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for
    feeling free and liberated.


    What you are saying seems anchored in duality
    https://endless-satsang.com/advaita-nonduality-oneness

    Apparently there are no true materialists on this list.

    My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists, is
    that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness
    itself is the ultimate reality.

    Because without consciousness, we would not exist.

    but also without we, consciousness wouldn't exist, eh???


    This is the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.

    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens for
    a reason.

    --
    hi, i'm nick! let's end war 🙃

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 06:11:25 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/6/2025 12:20 AM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/5/25 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.


    dude, do i really need to choose between dualism and non-dualism???

    both perspectives have their place it's not actually a contradiction

    we are all god is all of us

    eh????


    That does seem to be what Hindu Advaita says
    and the reason why we should love our neighbor
    as our self.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 06:12:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/6/2025 12:27 AM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/5/25 12:14 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 11:08 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 12:18 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/4/2025 11:25 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 12/4/25 11:22 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
    On 05/12/2025 02:25, Dude wrote:
    On 12/3/2025 12:09 PM, dart200 wrote:

    hey dude, did u ever get the cancer???

    Never had cancer, just obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and
    attention deficit disorder (ADD) with a mild case of seasonal
    allergies, which I self medicate with ephedrine.

    Fucking hell, I am gonna puke...

    @Thunderbird: please implement global filters!

    *PLONK*

    Julio


    dude, don't u love it when people actually *announce* their self-
    induced vanity??? 😂😂😂

    🤡🌎

    It is amusing to see an informant go full dictator on the group and
    puke over mere words on a screen. I would give Julio a 3 on a scale
    of 10. Not bad for a newbie!

    Ned got a 10 from me. Good work!

    See Nick, I belong to a very minor, obscure

    i, however, take no sides and give no quarter

    and deviant religious

    be "deviant" u mean sex??? like the ancient indian figurines with the
    nice boobies? horny ass mf figured out boob jobs would exist millennia before we could do them... nice

    Hindu sect. It has been described as regressive and accused of
    acting out often in public, as a form of spiritual witnessing.

    Often members of my sect carry cell phones and will be seen video
    taping people's reactions, as a form of public education and
    individual First Amendment rights.

    To that end, they may shout obscenities or make vulgar comments to
    passersby, in an effort to get attention. It's that simple.

    The purpose of this activity is to provoke negative reactions in
    people and then post the video onto TikTac for all to see people go
    berserk with hatred.

    So, as to help them burn up their accrued bad karma and be free of
    the negative forces, in order to provide the ideal opportunity for
    feeling free and liberated.


    What you are saying seems anchored in duality
    https://endless-satsang.com/advaita-nonduality-oneness

    Apparently there are no true materialists on this list.

    My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists,
    is that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness
    itself is the ultimate reality.

    Because without consciousness, we would not exist.

    but also without we, consciousness wouldn't exist, eh???


    There is no we there is only consciousness.


    This is the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.
    ;
    So, for starters:

    There's no fucking Buddha; it's all about sex. Everything happens
    for a reason.


    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 10:11:56 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    Are you nuts? How did you get in here?
    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.

    The US bombed the shit out of German u-boats in international waters in
    WW II. We blew the bastards out of the water! God damned Nazi Jew haters!

    Hit them! Hit them hard!

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats the fruit, the other looks on." - Mand Up 3.1.1
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 12:21:18 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/6/2025 12:11 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about sex.
    One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason: causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    Are you nuts? How did you get in here?
    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.

    The US bombed the shit out of German u-boats in international waters in
    WW II. We blew the bastards out of the water! God damned Nazi Jew haters!

    Hit them! Hit them hard!


    The kind of things that you say contradict
    themselves. You are not showing any "Mind Only" behavior.

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats the fruit, the other looks on." - Mand Up 3.1.1
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning" computable.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    for correct reasoning.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Dude@punditster@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 13:32:19 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/6/2025 10:21 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/6/2025 12:11 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 5:57 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 7:51 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2025 4:22 PM, Dude wrote:

    Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to.

    If you are a Mind Only Buddhist you are
    doing a terrible job of it.

    Consciousness is the ultimate reality. There is no Buddha in the
    absolute sense. Duality is an appearance only and it's all about
    sex. One thing leads to another. Everything happens for a reason:
    causation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mandukya Up 3.1.1

    That does not seems consistent with playing some
    of the head games that you say that you play.

    Are you nuts? How did you get in here?
    That people in boats are being murdered is Satanic
    even if Satan is a figure-of-speech.

    The US bombed the shit out of German u-boats in international waters
    in WW II. We blew the bastards out of the water! God damned Nazi Jew
    haters!

    Hit them! Hit them hard!


    The kind of things that you say contradict
    themselves. You are not showing any "Mind Only" behavior.

    Are you kidding?

    The historical Buddha was a master of self defense! Apparently, he was
    born into a Sakya military clan. In his spare time he used to do yoga exercises and meditate under a Banyan tree.

    One of his later students went all the way from India to China to teach Buddhist meditation. He sat facing a wall meditating for nine years. In
    his spare time he invented the martial arts called Shaolin Kung Fu.

    "Armed with yoga, O Bhaarata, stand and fight" -BG 4.42

    "Two birds, inseparable companions, perch on the same tree, one eats
    the fruit, the other looks on." - Mand Up 3.1.1



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy on Sat Dec 6 18:48:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 12/5/2025 10:20 PM, dart200 wrote:
    [...]
    we are all god is all of us

    Sigh. You think we are all god, oh my.

    [...]
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mild Shock@janburse@fastmail.fm to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory on Wed Dec 10 21:20:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    Hi,

    The French Enlightenment (roughly 1700–1789)
    produced extraordinary advances in mathematics,
    science, and philosophy, but its concept of geometry
    was still deeply tied to Euclid, and that limited
    what even brilliant thinkers could imagine.

    What was Euclid really doing?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-MgQC6z3VU

    Amazingling during the French Engligment the
    Parallel Postuale was not yet recognized as
    independent. Rather we find:

    - Adrien-Marie Legendre (1752–1833)
    Repeatedly revised arguments to derive
    the parallel postulate

    - Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813)
    Gave a lecture trying to derive the parallel
    axiom from properties of similar triangles

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I always admired the French Teaching of Logic.
    This silly Philosophy Professor scolded me a couple
    of times with this nonsense, playing dumb and deaf,

    like a complete idiot:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize. https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78


    Still his prover demonstrates LEM from RAA:

    ?-prove((a | ~a)).
    \begin{prooftree}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot  \lnot A$}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot A$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \to E $}}
    \BinaryInfC{$\bot$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ IP $}  1}
    \UnaryInfC{$A \lor  \lnot A$}
    \end{prooftree} https://g4-mic.vidal-rosset.net/wasm/tinker#prove((a%20%7C%20~a)).

    Please note that RAA = IP, synonymous names.
    Reductio Ad Absurdum and Indirect Proof.

    LoL

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    In the coming age of analog computing,
    symbolic logic means nothing:

    “The high data-rate sense perception and
    identification abilities of the human system
    mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We
      are generally conscious of a cognitive
    recognition after the fact. In this way, what
    we understand as consciousness has to be
    identified as a reflexive monitoring ability
    with quite limited application. To produce
    consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we
    are stepping down, not up.”
    ― Frank Herbert, Destination: Void

    Bye



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mild Shock@janburse@fastmail.fm to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory on Wed Dec 10 21:32:37 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    Hi,

    Even Rene Descartes was not aware of the
    independence. Descartes’s failure has the same
    underlying cause as later ones.

    His algebraic setup already assumes Euclidean
    geometry. He used geometric intuitions that were
    secretly equivalent to Euclid’s axiom. He

    lacked the concept of alternate geometries.

    What an AI could have done (According to ChatGPT):

    (A) Reveal hidden assumptions in every failed proof
    An AI could:
    - symbolically analyze the proof
    - extract all uses of implicit Euclidean intuition
    - point out: “This step assumes that similar triangles
    can be scaled arbitrarily, which is equivalent to
    the parallel postulate.”

    That kind of meta-analysis was unavailable to human
    mathematicians of the time.

    (B) Construct explicit models of non-Euclidean geometries
    The big conceptual leap of the 19th century was the ability
    to imagine a consistent geometry in which the parallel
    postulate is false.

    An AI could directly produce:
    - the Poincaré disk model
    - the hyperboloid model
    - the upper half-plane model

    and demonstrate that all of Euclid’s axioms (except the
    parallel postulate) hold in these spaces.

    (C) Clarify the logical structure of axioms
    Hilbert’s axiomatization (1899) came very late, but
    an AI could produce a clean formal structure centuries earlier:
    - incidence axioms
    - order axioms
    - congruence axioms
    - continuity axioms

    parallel axiom as a separate toggle
    This framework itself would have been revolutionary.

    Bye

    Disclaimer: Not sure how much of (A), (B) and (C) are
    fact or fuction. Don't have Google DeepMind company
    badge. See my other post

    Subject: Turing-Test to Birch++-Test [Professor Yang-Hui He]
    Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 14:55:28 +0100

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    The French Enlightenment (roughly 1700–1789)
    produced extraordinary advances in mathematics,
    science, and philosophy, but its concept of geometry
    was still deeply tied to Euclid, and that limited
    what even brilliant thinkers could imagine.

    What was Euclid really doing?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-MgQC6z3VU

    Amazingling during the French Engligment the
    Parallel Postuale was not yet recognized as
    independent. Rather we find:

    - Adrien-Marie Legendre (1752–1833)
      Repeatedly revised arguments to derive
      the parallel postulate

    - Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813)
      Gave a lecture trying to derive the parallel
      axiom from properties of similar triangles

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I always admired the French Teaching of Logic.
    This silly Philosophy Professor scolded me a couple
    of times with this nonsense, playing dumb and deaf,

    like a complete idiot:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize.
    https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78


    Still his prover demonstrates LEM from RAA:

    ?-prove((a | ~a)).
    \begin{prooftree}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot  \lnot A$}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot A$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \to E $}}
    \BinaryInfC{$\bot$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ IP $}  1}
    \UnaryInfC{$A \lor  \lnot A$}
    \end{prooftree}
    https://g4-mic.vidal-rosset.net/wasm/tinker#prove((a%20%7C%20~a)).

    Please note that RAA = IP, synonymous names.
    Reductio Ad Absurdum and Indirect Proof.

    LoL

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    In the coming age of analog computing,
    symbolic logic means nothing:

    “The high data-rate sense perception and
    identification abilities of the human system
    mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We
      are generally conscious of a cognitive
    recognition after the fact. In this way, what
    we understand as consciousness has to be
    identified as a reflexive monitoring ability
    with quite limited application. To produce
    consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we
    are stepping down, not up.”
    ― Frank Herbert, Destination: Void

    Bye




    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From x@x@x.net to alt.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.theory on Wed Dec 10 13:48:23 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    You know someone in the thread in another usenet
    group used the words 'axiomless geometry'.

    You know various technicians in various
    fields often make their terminology
    unclear without explaining it. Then
    others do that even more and more and
    more. But without anyone explaining
    it then it becomes gibberish.

    The whole idea is to pay money to
    'educators' who then explain to
    children what the terms mean for
    money. But if people easily knew
    what the terms meant then they might
    pay educators less and they collectively
    of course do not want that.

    I think that the words 'geo metry'
    means 'earth measurement'.

    The axioms are the rules of the game,
    but the game remains useful because
    those rules tend to parallel what
    you get when you actually measure
    something like 'earth measurement'.
    There might be an exact meaning for
    'axiomless geometry' somewhere or
    maybe not.


    On 12/10/25 12:32, Mild Shock wrote:
    Hi,

    Even Rene Descartes was not aware of the
    independence. Descartes’s failure has the same
    underlying cause as later ones.

    His algebraic setup already assumes Euclidean
    geometry. He used geometric intuitions that were
    secretly equivalent to Euclid’s axiom. He

    lacked the concept of alternate geometries.

    What an AI could have done (According to ChatGPT):

    (A) Reveal hidden assumptions in every failed proof
    An AI could:
    - symbolically analyze the proof
    - extract all uses of implicit Euclidean intuition
    - point out: “This step assumes that similar triangles
    can be scaled arbitrarily, which is equivalent to
    the parallel postulate.”

    That kind of meta-analysis was unavailable to human
    mathematicians of the time.

    (B) Construct explicit models of non-Euclidean geometries
    The big conceptual leap of the 19th century was the ability
    to imagine a consistent geometry in which the parallel
    postulate is false.

    An AI could directly produce:
    - the Poincaré disk model
    - the hyperboloid model
    - the upper half-plane model

    and demonstrate that all of Euclid’s axioms (except the
    parallel postulate) hold in these spaces.

    (C) Clarify the logical structure of axioms
    Hilbert’s axiomatization (1899) came very late, but
    an AI could produce a clean formal structure centuries earlier:
    - incidence axioms
    - order axioms
    - congruence axioms
    - continuity axioms

    parallel axiom as a separate toggle
    This framework itself would have been revolutionary.

    Bye

    Disclaimer: Not sure how much of (A), (B) and (C) are
    fact or fuction. Don't have Google DeepMind company
    badge. See my other post

    Subject: Turing-Test to Birch++-Test [Professor Yang-Hui He]
    Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 14:55:28 +0100

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    The French Enlightenment (roughly 1700–1789)
    produced extraordinary advances in mathematics,
    science, and philosophy, but its concept of geometry
    was still deeply tied to Euclid, and that limited
    what even brilliant thinkers could imagine.

    What was Euclid really doing?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-MgQC6z3VU

    Amazingling during the French Engligment the
    Parallel Postuale was not yet recognized as
    independent. Rather we find:

    - Adrien-Marie Legendre (1752–1833)
       Repeatedly revised arguments to derive
       the parallel postulate

    - Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813)
       Gave a lecture trying to derive the parallel
       axiom from properties of similar triangles

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I always admired the French Teaching of Logic.
    This silly Philosophy Professor scolded me a couple
    of times with this nonsense, playing dumb and deaf,

    like a complete idiot:

    Me: LEM is derivable from RAA, in minimal logic.
    Prof: LEM is not even derivable from RAA in intuitionistic logic.
    Me: You didn’t use RAA as an inference schema!
    Prof: Our discussion is about logic and not about Prolog. I apologize.
    https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/needing-help-with-call-with-depth-limit-3/7398/78

    Still his prover demonstrates LEM from RAA:

    ?-prove((a | ~a)).
    \begin{prooftree}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot  \lnot A$}
    \AxiomC{\scriptsize{1}}
    \noLine
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot (A \lor  \lnot A)$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \lor\to E$}}
    \UnaryInfC{$ \lnot A$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ \to E $}}
    \BinaryInfC{$\bot$}
    \RightLabel{\scriptsize{$ IP $}  1}
    \UnaryInfC{$A \lor  \lnot A$}
    \end{prooftree}
    https://g4-mic.vidal-rosset.net/wasm/tinker#prove((a%20%7C%20~a)).

    Please note that RAA = IP, synonymous names.
    Reductio Ad Absurdum and Indirect Proof.

    LoL

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    In the coming age of analog computing,
    symbolic logic means nothing:

    “The high data-rate sense perception and
    identification abilities of the human system
    mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We
      are generally conscious of a cognitive
    recognition after the fact. In this way, what
    we understand as consciousness has to be
    identified as a reflexive monitoring ability
    with quite limited application. To produce
    consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we
    are stepping down, not up.”
    ― Frank Herbert, Destination: Void

    Bye





    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2