Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs <jim.sprigs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:46:37 +0000 (UTC)
Peter_Smith wrote:
>
> The Godel sentence is formed (in one version) by substituting into a
> certain open wff U(x) the standard numeral for the Godel number of that
> open wff.
>
> So even if we could fairly readily write down U(x) over a few dozen
> pages, its Godel number at least on Godel's own scheme will be
> horrendous (vastly more than the number of particles in the known
> universe),
Thanks. That was my worry, though I had not realized it was quite
_that_ bad.
> so writing down Godel sentence which embeds the standard
> numeral SSS...S0 with that number of occurrences of the successor
> function will be .... erm ...difficult!
>
> Which just dramatically makes the point that the size of "the" Godel
> sentence here is evidently entirely dependent on the scheme of
> Godel-coding that we use.
--
I don't know who you are Sir, or where you come from,
but you've done me a power of good.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Barb Knox
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- References:
- Goedel's undecidable G
- From: LordBeotian
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Kazimierz Kurz
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
- Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Peter_Smith
- Goedel's undecidable G
- Prev by Date: Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- Next by Date: Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- Previous by thread: Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- Next by thread: Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|