The logiccal reason for being "ridiculous"  of "LIAR" antinomy discussion

THERE are TWO!!!!! ! !!!
"forms" of a LIE, thar is a congradicton between a TRUE and a FALSE truth value.
1) if you apply TRUE  to a FALSE statement
2) if you apply FALSE to a TRUE  statement
This second form ist "forgotten", left out
in the antinomies argumentations. This is "ridiculous" for a 2000 years
professional discussion.

Galileis. "Neverthless (his withdrawal)  the earth moves", i skonwn "by heart" by ebe scientist.
King Sallom in his wise judgmet. The real moth LIED THAT SHE LIED. is known "yb heart2 by every tnbholgican, the second profssional as logicians too.  
 
"Ther is no such thing like a proposition written here
is directly of this form" plain TREURE by self-pefomnce, but denying it.  

This propsition  is false" has  to be exaponded in order to get any logicla conrolled sense at all into:
 

"This is  a propostion NAMELY:"This proposition",
which is false";

which is palinly  FALSE by"self perfomance".

THis is done in BOOLEAN LOGIC by requiring "NOT" in place of "false"  in the proposition while the second FALSE
is the ADDITIONAL  PROPOSITIONAL FUNCTIONAL ASSIGNMEMT:
This is forgotten too, WHICH IS "ridicouluS" for a 200 yeear prfessional discission too,
as we have 2 times 2 truth values by 2 "varialsels.
TRUE TRUE
TRUE FALSE
NOT TRUE
NOT FALSE  
 
1) "This proposition is TRUE" is TRUE
2) "This proposition is TRUE"" is FALSE
3) THis prosition is NOT"  is TRUE
4) This proositiion is NOT" is false
 

4 "irrtating NOT BOOLEAN) "This propsotio is false"

as 1) equals "This is a proposition NAMELY THIS,
which is TRUE;" is TRUE.

 
"There is a thing like a proposition written here."  
is a PROOF of 1) by "self-performance",

the other 2)-3) are contradictory or simply false.