Lean verification registry · Authored proofs · The Logos Architecture
Written formal sequents verified
Axiom-free: true · 1 checked theorem statements.
Lean establishes the listed formal statements and dependencies. The exact authored source, Ground, known premise meanings, application validation and empirical evidence remain separately typed. No unencoded section is certified by a neighboring theorem.
Original source author: Maclain Hunter. Machine formalization: Replit Agent. No original wording was rewritten.
Source registered: 2026-10-03T01:36:28.735Z (not original authorship).
Formalized: 2026-10-03T10:37:05.082Z.
Checked: 2026-10-03T10:39:17.746Z.
Independent timestamp: 2026-10-03T10:42:55.000Z.
Authored source SHA-256: 3d66c32cbe9331fdae526edc6e096a677cb4ca94acda7df766282c557e22f64e
Lean source · Verification JSON · Exact archived source JSON · Compiler report · Current authored source page · Signed release and verification instructions
Lean (version 4.7.0, commit v4.7.0, Release) exitCode=0 'HunterAuthored.inference_1' does not depend on any axioms
{P, P -> Q, Q -> R, R -> S, S -> T} |= (P & Q) & (R & S) & T
Exact source sequent under finite two-valued propositional semantics. Source proposition meanings and Logic/Logos/God Ground are preserved separately; this checks the inference, not unencoded prose.
P: Logic is the Logical Basis of Logic and logical concepts (including Science and Reality).
Q: Assume P is false. That leads to logical contradiction as Logic is the logical basis in general and universally, for Science, Logic, Reality, or otherwise.
R: A teacher that doesn’t know Logic and how to apply it, and who cannot answer on demand the question of what Logic is and how to apply it (and logical rules) is poorly qualified to teach by the Logical Standard.
S: Assume R is untrue, then a good teacher could lack knowledge of “how to know things” (Logic) which would be contradictory and would undermine the central importance of Logic in education, where Logic is the very “Logical Basis”.
T: If someone who claims to be a teacher cannot tell an inquirer what Logic is and how to apply Logic then it is reasonable to question the authenticity of their credentials.
Formal Argument (Proof):
{P, P -> Q, Q -> R, R -> S, S -> T} |= (P & Q) & (R & S) & T
Conclusion:
Logic, being the Logical Basis of Logic and Reality is the “Basis of Science and Education”. A “teacher” that cannot demonstrate even basic knowledge of logical rules and the application of Logic makes a dubious claim when they then claim to be a qualified teacher and can reasonably be seen as “not a true teacher”.