ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS forcontrolledvalue

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Bill Andersen <andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:30:38 -0400
Message-id: <0EA200FD-89F0-4150-8CD5-14358F8A52D4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Rich    (01)

Please include me as a proud member on your list of ignorant asserters of the 
commonplace. Thank you.     (02)

Bill    (03)



On Oct 14, 2010, at 14:13, "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:    (04)

> Chris you remain much too annoying and rude to waste any further time on.
> Discuss it with others on the list who can put up with your ignorant
> assertion of the commonplace.  I am out.  
> 
> -Rich
> 
> Sincerely,
> Rich Cooper
> EnglishLogicKernel.com
> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher
> Menzel
> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:52 AM
> To: [ontolog-forum] 
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS
> forcontrolledvalues for controlledvocabulary]
> 
> On Oct 14, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>> 
>> Thanks for you post, you seem to be honestly trying to understand what I
> meant by the statement "there is no function that can iterate the primes",
> and perhaps I should have originally said "directly, without iterating other
> types", which seems to have set off this mess.  But I expected Menzel to
> make an honest answer instead of an ad hominem attack.  
> 
> I apologize for the *ad hominem* elements of my response, but I gave a very
> detailed, "good-faith" critique of all of your claims about Gödel's theorem
> and its proof.  I have to admit to having very little patience for people
> who misrepresent Gödel's work -- which you did, several times, particularly
> in your claim about Gödel's results all being "based on the primes", a claim
> you have yet to acknowledge as bogus.  I would have no problem at all
> engaging in a more cool-headed way over the meaning of the term "iterate".
> Unfortunately, you still seem to think that the fact that "there is no
> iterator of [the primes]", in your sense of "iterator", is somehow connected
> to Gödel's theorem.  It simply isn't, and the fact that you don't see it
> means that you don't understand the theorem or its proof.
> 
> -chris
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     (05)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>