/sci/ - Science & Math

meds now

>set theory
stopped reading

>>15214942

The schizo fears the computer.

>>15215298
>if you build it, they will come

>>15215318
This happens to be related to 4 color conjecture sophistry.
Gödel started a German tradition of conducting hostile manipulation of Western press.
Appel and Haken continued it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-surveyable_proof
This span of mathematical hoaxes of German origin targeting the Anglosphere spans the years 1938-1976, and the thuggish "I own you, and I'm going to hurt you" style of this communication resembles William Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists

>>15215332
https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.24.12.556

>>15215332
>>15215340

>>15215338
>>15215342

Schizo just can't stop losing against the computer. BTFO'd by 58 pages of heavily commented code.

>>15215347
You aren't taking OP's accusation of academic fraud seriously.
You aren't taking OP's accusation that Jech is fraudulently concealing Fitch's work seriously.
Why not?

>>15215368
Solvitur ambulando.

>>15215390
real proofs have
- subproofs
- guard variables
- scoping rules that designate proof subsegments by indentation
- guard variable use rules must be followed in proof content surrounding subproofs
so you're suggesting that you've already explained how all of this fits together
but you haven't
you're lying
so are all of the people concealing Fitch's hard work

>>15215400
You keep crying about that but then ignore a literal raw proof object in the form of a short program lmao.

>>15215390
>you're stupid if you don't understand
You people are really fucking pathetic.

>>15215405
>you're ignoring the proof
there is no proof
what are you talking about
point to the proof
it's like you expect me to pretend that I can figure out what you're talking about when clearly you're just saying
>hey dude
there's a proof
>and you're ignoring it
haha
>sucka

>>15215422
Coq is mechanized natural deduction, so if you have a problem with Coq, you have a problem with Fitch notation, too.

>>15215405
You are not doing modern, rigorous, axiomatic mathematics if you pretend that a proof is the same thing as a program.
You don't understand that you have to call it something other than proof.
It's a program.
It isn't a proof.
You're not supposed to claim
>proof is this
>i have defined proof to be this
Do you even understand why you aren't supposed to do that?

>>15215430
you people are insane
https://github.com/clarus/falso
it is insane how you want to disparage Fitch
it is absolutely nuts
what the fuck is wrong with you people
I mean
>holy
fucking
>shit
you people are fucking psychos
it's unreal

>>15215430
Fucked up people are involved with the Coq project. I hate those people.

>>15215436
A Coq proof has
>subproofs
>variables
>scoping rules

Oh no no no Fitch bros how could this be?? Is this an instance of ACADEMIC PLAGIARISM?!?

>>15215442
>[Edit] This bug was corrected in Coq 8.4.6.
Lmao, laughable.

>>15215446
It is insane how you people want to fuck things up. It is insane.
It's pure anti-Anglo racism.
Go to /pol/ now, bitch.

>>15215446
you're suggesting that the reputation of these people wasn't destroyed
>you're
fucking
>hopeless

>>15215448
>>15215453
>Fitch worked primarily in combinatory logic, authoring an undergraduate-level textbook on the subject (1974), but he also made significant contributions to intuitionism
Oh no no no Fitch bros, he worked on the same intuitionistic logic upon which Coq is founded... he betrayed us.

How will we ever recover???

>>15215455
you're trying to disparage Fitch's name by associating him with the idiots responsible for Coq
this is really sick and twisted
what you're doing is
>very
nasty

>>15215460
https://philpapers.org/rec/FITRBT
https://philpapers.org/rec/FITGNA
https://www.jstor.org/stable/20009132
He even worked on Godel's theorems (the mathematical anti-Christ!)

I don't feel so good Fitch bros...

>>15215455
you're trying to suggest some really disgusting hero worship into math
you are
>FUCKED
UP
god damn
you are
>seriously
fucked
>up

>>15215467
it's really sickening to suggest that contact with Fitch be saturated with idiotic hero worship
there is something seriously fucked up with you
you're trying to disparage Fitch's name
what you're doing is totally fucked up

>>15215468
>>15215482
>"MUH FITCH MUH FITCH MUH FITCH"
>here's something Fitch actually did (spoiler: what you're pissing your pants about)
>"NOOOO THIS IS HERO WORSHIP"
You have a bad case of retard.

>>15215467
injecting religion into math fucks math up
it turns math into poetry
you have to go to /lit/ if you want to talk like that

>>15215488
You are disruptive and derailing the thread.
You aren't taking the accusation against Jech seriously.
Why not?
Why aren't you taking this accusation of academic fraud against Jech seriously?

>>15215497
B-b-but the hard work of Fitch!! You're disparaging Fitch and his hard work!
I hereby diagnose you with... poetry.
>>>/lit/
>>>/his/

>>15215507
You are refusing to take the accusation against Jech seriously.
You are ignoring the serious accusation of academic misconduct against Jech.
You are disrupting this thread.
Get out.

>>15215507
it's really insane how you want to deflect and derail the discussion
>you
are
>evil

>>15215515
>>15215505
So... why do you ignore an easily human verifiable mechanized Coq proof of Godel's theorems that models (and has to model) explicitly the exact pain point you're complaining about, i.e. proof objects and their syntax?

>>15215507
this comment is about ridiculing me in retaliation for bringing a case of academic fraud to the attention of 4chan
this is hostile

>>15215525
Not only I did ridicule you, I WILL continue doing it until I get bored, because you take yourself so seriously. Welcome to 4chan, gramps.

>>15215522
You are consistently trying to bring distraction after distraction into this thread, thereby derailing it.
The focus of this thread is the accusation of academic misconduct against Jech.
Focus on the topic, or get out, asshole.
You are asking for attention.
You are a distraction.
Coq is not related to this accusation of academic fraud. It has nothing to do with this accusation of academic fraud.
The Coq remarks are spam.

>>15215527
you are spamming Coq in violation of 4chan rules
you are a tolerated rule breaker
I'm trying to focus discussion and you're spamming the thread.
Fuck you.

Identifying "Coq spam" comments
>>15215430
>Coq
>>15215446
>Coq
>>15215455
>Coq
>>15215522
>Coq

>>15215532
From OP:
>Jech never defines "proof". Jech is proof that everything that I've been saying about Gödel is correct.
But Godel's theorems can be verified independently of Jech. So your schizo meltdown about Jech is ultimately meaningless.

>>15215533
>you are spamming Coq in violation of 4chan rules
What rule does posting about Coq break?

>>15215545
You need to focus on the fact that Jech has committed academic fraud if you want to participate in this thread.
You're derailing the thread.

>>15215552
spamming/flodding

>>15215554
How did Jech commit academic fraud by not elaborating on Godel's theorems in his book on set theory?

>>15215559
You aren't focusing on the content of the accusation.
You're trying to bring
>neglecting to elaborate on Gödel's theorems
into this discussion, but that isn't relevant
you need to make points that are relevant to the OP

>>15215561
>Accusation. Sophistry and fallacious argument concealing hard work of Fitch related to an algorithm for verifying that subproof guard variable scoping rules have been followed in all subproofs and surrounding proof content.
How is Fitch's work relevant in the context of Jech's book on set theory, given that he is not using Fitch notation anywhere in the book?

>Introduction of undefined term "proof".
Where is this undefined term used in a way that proves fatal to a mathematical argument in the book?

>>15215569
Hello, Thomas.
You're the defendant.
Sit down.
You're being accused of academic fraud.
It's a very serious accusation.

>>15215294
>schizo rambling
Go back to /x/

>>15215569
Once you start doing poetry in a math book, the rest of the math book turns into poetry.
We can't identify mathematical arguments in the book after the introduction of the undefined term "proof".
There are poems wearing mathematical argument's clothing, but no genuine mathematical arguments.

>>15215587
Why are you derailing now? You should focus on the topic. Should I call the jannys on you for "derailing the thread"? Lol.

>>15215595
And now we're back again. How is not elaborating on Godel's theorems "poetry" and academic fraud when
- Jech's book is on set theory
- Godel's theorems are verifiable independently of his book
?

>>15215569
If Jech hadn't committed academic fraud, then he would have incorporated the knowledge of guard variables and subproofs Fitch brought to mathematics into his text or omitted the fallacious use of the word "proof".

>>15215596
>>15215605
this is a whole bunch of irrelevant garbage
clearly somebody is trying to protect Jech

>>15215614
Why is Fitch notation more meritorious above all other notational systems for formal proofs of appearing in Jech's book?

>>15215619
Why are you deflecting?

>>15215605
So now you're suggesting that Jech's failure is one of omission rather the commission.
Jech committed an error that destroys the value of his work.
It isn't that he neglected to include some material.
When shit plus ice cream equals shit, you don't get to add more ice cream and then claim
>this ice cream is free of shit
there is still shit

>>15215630
I'm bet you're still in time to refund it, if you bought it for a proof of Godel's theorems, which you could have found for free online anyway.

>>15215624
You're assuming that Fitch is the only victim in this fraud.
I'm not going to tell you if that's a correct assumption.
You might be right.
You might be wrong.
However, you won't get the answer from me.
You're failing to account for the possibility that others besides Fitch are victims in this fraud.
You're assuming that OP has all of the information.
That's unlikely in any case, academic fraud or not.
We don't have to be omniscient.
Don't suggest that lack of omniscience is going to obstruct 4chan's consideration of this matter of academic fraud.

>>15215637
Thomas, sit down. Your career is over.
>WRITE
ME
>A
SONNET

>>15215653
You found me. It's over for me, Thomas Jech. Everything I have I stole from Fitch.

>>15215646
What is Fitch victim of? Not getting mentioned in a book on a topic somewhat adjacent to his work...?

>>15215660
No, the only 4chan reader with this kind of action is
>le *sigh*
pic related
>le *ACK*
>le *PHHT*
>le hacker known as
>A
N
>A
C
>O
N
>I can see Confucius' tomb from here...

>>15215677
Ana Coppola

>>15215669
you have to understand
- explicit definitional expansions (see Hodges "A Shorter Model Theory" p. 53)
- pumping lemma for context free languages (see [1])
- rectification of names (see [2])
- how selling a reader a chain of nonsense definitions is a rectification of names issue that fraudulently suggests Fitch's work is further away from mathematics than it actually is
- how Jech's work puts Fitch's work at the bottom of a well, separating Fitch's work from mathematics with an infinite regression of failures to define "proof" resulting from replacing one undefined term with another
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumping_lemma_for_context-free_languages
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectification_of_names

>>15215696
It seems to me that Fitch's work lives on in natural deduction style calculi, far from being a victim.

It doesn't seem to me that it is Jech's duty to right any wrong Fitch might have suffered, when the topic of his book is only adjacent to that of Fitch.

As for omitting the proof of Godel's theorems, it doesn't seem to me that there is an issue of infinite regress, because there exist independent closed proofs of the theorems that you can verify independently of Jech's book.

>>15215713
>irrelevant garbage
>that spacing
plebbitor detected
drunken plebbitor

>>15215728
Why are you deflecting? Stay on topic.

please see aggregate Gödel comment in /mg/
>>15216084

So, the OP is definitely not making it clear that Fitch isn't the only one who is harmed by Jech's "pumping lemma vs. rectification of names" error, and this is a research error, a legitimate one, not a case of academic fraud as OP fallaciously claims.
I don't see mens rea or even anything remotely like it, nor does it appear Fitch is aware of this so-called "harm" or would even be harmed by anything Jech could say or even any of these proceedings, which would be mere free publicity...I'm actually not partial to Doritos. For a truly refined corn snack, we need Fritos.

>>15215687
...,Caturday,Ana Conday)
>he hasn't heard
THE
>LEGEND
OF
>ANA
C
>O
N
>YOU'RE
A
>GODDAMN
MENACE!!!!
terrorist terrorist terrorist terrorist

>>15215448
/pol/ is pure anglo

>>15215294
jech also uses the undefined notion "limit" here, this whole book is full of holes