Re: AW: VMs: Random Text Generation

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Claus,

> I think, that VMS and proof are words which are mutally exclusive.Within 
> the VMS context, you can "prove" anything you like.The only thing, you can 
> do is guessing.But no proof.

Wearing my logician hat (it's a nice fit, though the style's a little 
dated), it's clear that proof means different things to different people. 
For example, a lot of what I've been doing is far closer to an "art history 
proof" than a "smoking gun proof".

My idea (or perhaps conceit) is that, by working to identify the VMS' 
probable time, place, context, and perhaps even its author, content, and 
audience, we're collectively more likely to be able to build a smoking gun 
proof on top of all that.

I certainly believe an art history proof is possible - for example, I've 
been evaluating one particular hypothesis for the last six month, which 
stubbornly resists my attempts at both falsification and verification. In 
other words, it's truth state is the Intuitionist logic third value, "not 
constructible".

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list