Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: jackbatlin@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 7 Feb 2007 05:55:40 -0800
Hi,
Godel's first incompleteness theorem states that any consistent theory
capable of expressing basic aritmetical truths about numbers is
incomplete, i.e. there exists a wff S such that neither S nor not(S)
is provable in the theory. But the most interesting thing is that S is
true, model-wise. So we "know" that there exists a theorem that cannot
be proven.
My questions are:
- Does the same condition hold to other first-order theories? I.e. to
have an undecidable but true (model-wise) wff. (Obviously I know that
if so, that's not proven via Godel's theorem, but via other
theorems... do you know which ones?)
- Are these theories consistent anyway?
Thanks.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: Charlie-Boo
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: george
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: george
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: Rupert
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: Frederick Williams
- Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- Prev by Date: "Sentential logic" as a theory or as a "framework" for theories?
- Next by Date: Re: "Sentential logic" as a theory or as a "framework" for theories?
- Previous by thread: "Sentential logic" as a theory or as a "framework" for theories?
- Next by thread: Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|