Chris and Pat, (01)
one thing you must agree is that arithmetics is about
operations such as + and -. If one can reason at all,
one has to understand how to use these operations.
To understand these operations is the same as
understanding the difference between one rock and
two rocks. There is nothing more into it. (02)
Then people created all sorts of formal systems
and wanted to prove everything. None of these
makes arithmetic any more secure, better, or more
usable in any way. Still they talk about an
incompleteness and completeness of arithmetics. (03)
> (*) Not everything can be proved
>
> is, in the worst case, meaningless and, in the best case, ambiguous
> (and false either way). Provability is always relative to a formal
> system; (04)
I still understand Gödel's proof as a proof that you
just cannot govern everything. It is clear even
without any proof about it. One way to prove that
all cannot be proved is the simple fact 1+1=2 cannot
be proved. Or, if you prove it in some formal system,
then the axioms of that formal system cannot be
proven true. (05)
The theorem was a clear blow to some people who
thought that everything can be governed, or
put under some mathematical axioms. There's
no denying that. (06)
> All the more ironic that you can parrot an accurate statement of
> Gödel's Theorem, which you obviously googled, and then reiterate the
> same muddled paraphrase of it. (07)
No, this time I copied it directly from Wikipedia :) (08)
A (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
|