[spam][crazy][fiction][random] Non-Canon MCBoss Spinoffs

[mailbombbin]

summary of my theory: godel’s conclusions stem from inferring from a
logical contradiction with the axioms of logic and statements.
anything at all could be inferred when this is done. i describe “this
statement is unprovable” as contradictory and meaningless in a logic
where true sttements are all provable, because i describe every
statement as containing an implicit “this statement is true.” in other
logics, the sentence would need to disambiguate in what logic it 8s
stating itself to be provable or not in, and would have normal truth
or sensicalness relative to the logic of interpretation.
i might cast these as mistakes: assuming a universal sense of truth
when there is more than one logic, forming inferences from a statement
that forms a contradiction with axioms, …
i’m unsure what to consider the truth of a sentence that conflicts
with axioms, maybe it seems false in a logic that describes the logic
containing the axioms, it seems it might work to call it unknown or
undefined.
i arrived at this by considering a natural logic based on a depiction
of every possible event. in this logic self-referential statements
only have use if they have bearing on the world, and their
interpretations can be derived from reality when that is.