Hacker News Reader

i asked you a pretty "computable" question: what exactly do these words mean?

> I am certain their Navier-Stokes proof is incorrect.

Just assume standard semantics & it should make sense.

Sorry I need you to state your axioms here because as I stated above, "standard" semantical interpretation of the word "certain" implies you should be betting lots of money. Since you're not, I have to conclude you have some goofy unorthodox semantical interpretation.

By standard semantics, if you state that believing with certainty that the proof is incorrect is stupid, then you surely believe with certainty that it's correct.

Unless you want the negate the certainty part, but then the nudge to gambling is less coherent.

> By standard semantics, if you state that believing with certainty that the proof is incorrect is stupid, then you surely believe with certainty that it's correct.

you might want to think a little bit harder on this

You're failing to apply de Morgan's laws correctly:

(X and Y) => Z

<=>

~Z => (~X or ~Y)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com