On 3/5/2010 11:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

....In this list I have already well explained the seven step of UDA, andone difficulty remains in the step 8, which is the difference betweena computation and a description of computation. Due to the staticcharacter of Platonia, some believes it is the same thing, but it isnot, and this is hard to explain. That hardness is reflected in theAUDA: the 'translation' of UDA in arithmetic. The subtlety is thatagain, the existence of a computation is true if and only if theexistence of a description of the computation exist, but that is trueat the level G*, and not at the G level, so that such an equivalenceis not directly available, and it does not allow to confuse acomputation (a mathematical relation among numbers), and a descriptionof a computation (a number).

`This mixing of existence and true in the context of a logic confuses`

`me. I understand you take a Platonic view of arithmetic so that all`

`propositions of arithmetic are either true or false, even though most of`

`them are not provable (from any given finite axioms), so`

`true=/=provable. But what does it mean to say a computation is true at`

`one level and not another? Does it mean provable? or it there is some`

`other meaning of true relative to a logic?`

Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.