Post

but if I disagreed with the conjecture and you show me nothing as proof that's just going to make me disagree harder.

"I have reviewed this proof and find it appropriate" -Professor N. Othing.

Idk looks like the content of that box is the color white to me

Yes.

This seems unnecessarily extreme when it's so simple to have any chatbot fill in what I believe is scientifically referred to as "jibber jabber"

I am not falling into the MAGA trap

@fennert.bsky.social

Remonds me of the classic story about a final exam in a philosophy class with a single question Question: "Define risk." Student's answer: "Risk is this"

The general class of ZKP includes that and pretty much all the replies to social media arguments. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-kn...

I don’t get it. Is the idea that some people will be convinced by anything, even if “anything” is literally nothing?

‎

ingenious 🤣

Is nothing sacred?

the gop school of debate called they want their tactics back

An instrumental of Phil Collin’s “In the Air Tonight” plays out of the proof box and the reviewer just kind of “gets it”

I'm not buying it.

I'm 50% convinced. But the fact that I'm even partly convinced is in itself pretty convincing, so I'm updating that to 75%. And the proof's ability to change my mind that fast is even more impressive: 87.5%. Is a proof whose convincingness converges to 100% formally acceptable?

"without words, pictures, or content of any kind" modifies "to construct". This proof is constructed within, and thus not without, content. Without that contextual content, this proof could not be constructed. Therefore it's false.

Proof:

I'm not convinced

I am reminded of the 1974 paper by Upper, 'The Unsuccessful Self-Treatment of a Case of Writer's Block.'

We have the null hypothesis, but how about the null proof?

Yet, the proof not being convincing doesn't *disprove* the inverted hypothesis—merely fail to prove it while being simultaneously evidence for it. So we don't end up with a similar situation to Russell's Paradox.

Further like what?

Proof: me likey it

I'm not convinced

Rebuttal:

didn't convince me

This also proves that context is a critical component of communication.

Absent the conjecture the proof fails. Therefore by the terms of the conjecture the proof also fails.

Somebody get FIFA on the phone

The proof of all proofs that do not prove themselves.

Quite a few people use that for various arguments

[proof needed]