Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones"
From: Torkel Franzen (torkel_at_sm.luth.se)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Torkel Franzen: "Re: Are open formulae really needed?"
- Previous message: LordBeotian: "Re: Are open formulae really needed?"
- In reply to: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Next in thread: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Reply: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 30 Jan 2005 09:39:24 +0100
Helene.Boucher@wanadoo.fr writes:
> Look at it this way. Proof(x,y) - the first-order wff in PA that x is
> a Godel number of a proof P of the theorem T represented by the Godel
> number of y - asserts more than that P is a proof of T. One can
> imagine the situation where there is a proof P of T, but not that there
> is the extremely large number x which is used to represent the proof
> P.
If we take the view that the existence of n does not imply the
existence of 2^n, there is very much in mathematics that falls away,
and the question of whether Con(PA) is an adequate formalization of
"PA is consistent" becomes a very minor side issue.
- Next message: Torkel Franzen: "Re: Are open formulae really needed?"
- Previous message: LordBeotian: "Re: Are open formulae really needed?"
- In reply to: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Next in thread: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Reply: Helene.Boucher_at_wanadoo.fr: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading