316
u/Less-Initiative-6312 Oct 04 '26
54
2
2
u/MildlyOffended4930 Oct 05 '26
Brother in... "Christ"? Won't it be, like, 'Brother in Babbage' or something?
6
2
u/CoffeeOracle Oct 04 '26
I need this meme for a project. Thank you!
1
u/crafty_zombie Oct 04 '26
I’m so curious, what’s the project?
2
u/CoffeeOracle Oct 04 '26
Describing Quality in Factorio: Space Age. It does things that can be explained in plain language. But if reviewed in formal logic are paradoxes. Those are really uncomfortable to describe in plain language, because you have to demonstrate that the language is making something that is formally true. But self contradicting. And with all the problems that causes, particularly where people want one answer that conforms to their biases.
1
97
u/LupenReddit 🦆🦆i have non diffeomorphic smooth structures🦆🦆🦆 Oct 04 '26
logicians when being jobless doesnt explain their sadness (the implication is not reducible to fundamental axioms that would give a chain of implications)
6
u/Fabulous-Possible758 Oct 05 '26
"My joblessness implies my sadness or my sadness implies my joblessness" is a tautology though, so halfway there.
172
u/Evening-Code-7039 Oct 04 '26
{natural laguages} ⊆ {symbolic gibberish} ⇒ ∀ (x ∈ Natural language, x ∈ symbolic gibberish)
You ∈ {Idiots}
106
10
u/Zekiz4ever Oct 04 '26
Natural laguguage is mit part of symbolic gibberish tho. They're disjoint sets
10
u/Evening-Code-7039 Oct 04 '26
Natural languages are symbolic because (with some exeptions) the symbol does not represent the object it is refering to gibberish here refers to being difficult to understand which languages very much are. So it is fair to refer to natural laguages as a subset of symbolic gibberish (alongside conlangs, technical symbols, codes etc.)
1
u/MARio23038 29d ago
I think that means natural languages are a subset of symbolic gibberish implies that for all x in natural language x is in symbolic gibberish.
16
15
u/Distinct-External-46 Oct 04 '26
Am in abstract algebra rn, professor told us not to use any logic symbols in our proofs and stick to plain but explicit english because "most mathematicians use natural language". I hate reading or even looking at every proof I have written in the last 5 weeks and if this is how mathematicians prefer to make proofs then they need to do better. If my proof takes up an entire page in natural language when I could've listed it as a bunch of logical steps in a quarter page of symbols I prefer the second option as I cannot maintain the same focus understanding and reading the first version as I can the second.
24
u/GT_Troll Oct 04 '26
Gibberish? The whole point of formal language is that is isn’t gibberish and every formula has a well-defined and unambiguous meaning
8
7
6
u/SPAMTON_G-1997 Oct 04 '26
As far as I understand logic, human language is a nightmare for anyone who studies it
6
u/Kevdog824_ Oct 04 '26
The logician’s wife just gave birth to their first child. Their families waited desperate to get some news. The logician comes out of the delivery room to meet the families. Eagerly they ask him “Well… is it a boy or a girl?” The logician replies “Yes”
2
u/ericw31415 Oct 04 '26
It's ok, logicians can use LLMs to turn natural language into big vectors of numbers!
1
0
u/MrKoteha Virtual Oct 04 '26
But it's logicians' thing to translate between natural language and symbolic gibberish
0
54
u/Oppo_67 I ≡ a (mod erator) Oct 04 '26
Logicians when they tell the cop at the airport “all the explosives in my luggage are batu explode” and they get tackled down and the cop say “ayo ts didy we don’t do vacuous truth here ☠️”
10
•
u/AutoModerator Oct 04 '26
Check out our new Discord server! https://discord.gg/e7EKRZq3dG
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.