I took a stab at the paper and it seemed like they were trying to get outside the system with a sleight of hand involving probabilities. It seems like they are writing for a very small in-group. Ben: I think your writing is clear. I've been working through your book. People should write high-fallutin' metamath papers more like that.
On 8/25/14, Ben Goertzel via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > *** > > So the system in the paper by the MIRI guys seems to be based on a logical > language of analysis that would rule out certain kinds of sentences if they > tended toward not being logically evaluable. > *** > > No, not really; you seem to not understand their theorem ;p > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
