The Unavoidability of Belief within Reason

[Eodnhoj7]

Any percent of a margin of error is a margin of error. Do 99.99999999....% and .000...0001% differ? Yes, drastically.

You are rendering the difference immaterial if you call both things "unpredictability".

Given a long enough timeline all possibilities manifest.

[Skepdick]

Given a long enough timeline all possibilities manifest.

You were literally just arguing that they don't all manifest the same number of times. Make up your mind.

Something happening once and something happening 10^100 times over the same duration is not the same frequency of ocurrence.

[Eodnhoj7]

Given a long enough timeline all possibilities manifest.

You were literally just arguing that they don't all manifest the same number of times. Make up your mind.

If all possibilities manifest then the coin toss simultaneously manifests under the same number of times in one sphere and a different number of times in another. One sphere is observable, either one, and the other isn't.

Something happening once and something happening 10^100 times over the same duration is not the same frequency of ocurrence.

Yes.

[Skepdick]

If all possibilities manifest then the coin toss simultaneously manifests under the same number of times in one sphere and a different number of times in another. One sphere is observable, either one, and the other isn't.

You are describing superposition. Which has a wave function.

Yes.

So you cannot claim tautology.

Answering yes/no requires information. Tautologies contain none.

[Eodnhoj7]

If all possibilities manifest then the coin toss simultaneously manifests under the same number of times in one sphere and a different number of times in another. One sphere is observable, either one, and the other isn't.

You are describing superposition. Which has a wave function.

Yes.

So you cannot claim tautology.

Answering yes/no requires information. Tautologies contain none.

Tautologies are a variation of the original premise thus contain information by nature.

[Skepdick]

Tautologies are a variation of the original premise thus contain information by nature.

It's not a tautology if it's false under variation.

In logic, a tautology (from the Greek word ταυτολογία) is a formula or assertion that is true in every possible interpretation.

[Eodnhoj7]

Tautologies are a variation of the original premise thus contain information by nature.

It's not a tautology if it's false under variation.

A false variation is a disjunction where the tautology ceases and a new one is formed.

In logic, a tautology (from the Greek word ταυτολογία) is a formula or assertion that is true in every possible interpretation.

False, a tautology extends beyond logic and is:

"the saying of the same thing twice in different words, generally considered to be a fault of style (e.g., they arrived one after the other in succession )."



As to the truth of a tautology all assertions are true by the very means of existing. 2+2=5 observes a disjunction of 2+2 and 5 but 2 and 5 exist and as existing are true.

[Skepdick]

All assertions are true as existing. 2+2=5 observes a disjunction of 2+2 and 5 but 2 and 5 exist and as existing are true.

So you are OK if I borrow $5 from you? I'll pay you back. $2 next week, and $2 the week after.

In fact. Can I borrow 1000 * $5 from you?

I'll pay you back 1000 * $2 in 1 minute and 1000 * $2 in 2 minutes.

I've been waiting to Dutch-book some sucker for a loooong time!

[Eodnhoj7]

All assertions are true as existing. 2+2=5 observes a disjunction of 2+2 and 5 but 2 and 5 exist and as existing are true.

So you are OK if I borrow $5 from you? I'll pay you back. $2 next week, and $2 the week after.

In fact. Can I borrow 1000 * $5 from you?

I'll pay you back 1000 * $2 tomorrow and 1000 * $2 the day after.

False context. 2+2=5 is false. 2 and 5 however are true. A contradiction is a disjunction of truth values or rather truths which cease to align.

[Skepdick]

False context. 2+2=5 is false.

So it's not a tautology.

[Eodnhoj7]

False context. 2+2=5 is false.

So it's not a tautology.

The tautology, as a string, ceases to exist after "2+2=" and becomes a new tautology with 5. One truth statement diverges into another as multiple truth statements which do not align.

[Skepdick]

The tautology, as a string, ceases to exist after "2+2=" and becomes a new tautology with 5. One truth statement diverges into another as multiple truth statements which do not align.

A tautology requires alignment of truth-statements across all interpretations.

What you are calling a tautology isn't.

[Eodnhoj7]

The tautology, as a string, ceases to exist after "2+2=" and becomes a new tautology with 5. One truth statement diverges into another as multiple truth statements which do not align.

A tautology requires alignment of truth-statements across all interpretations.

What you are calling a tautology isn't.

False.

2 = 1+1
5 = 1+1+1+1+1.

All the variables which compose the statement are composed of repeating phenomena which align to form a new phenomena. 2 and 5 are tautologies of one.

[Skepdick]

All the variables which compose the statement are composed of repeating phenomena which align to form a new phenomena. 2 and 5 are tautologies of one.

2 is a tautology of 1+1
5 is a tautology of 1+1+1+1+1

2+2 is not a tautology of 5

asymmetry.

[Eodnhoj7]

All the variables which compose the statement are composed of repeating phenomena which align to form a new phenomena. 2 and 5 are tautologies of one.

2 is a tautology of 1+1
5 is a tautology of 1+1+1+1+1

2+2 is not a tautology of 5

asymmetry.

That is what I said, one set of tautologies diverts into another set considering each number is a tautology. 2+2=5 is composed of tautologies, but in itself is not a tautology...one tautology diverts into another different one. 2+2=4 observes 2+2 expressed twice in a different way as 4. 2+2=5 does not.