Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: "Rupert" <rupertmccallum@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 7 Feb 2007 15:34:04 -0800
On Feb 8, 12:55 am, jackbat...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
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.
Before you can make sense of the idea of a sentence being true, you
have to specify a model for the theory. Consider the theory of real-
closed fields, for example. This theory is recursively axiomatizable,
and a sentence is true in the model consisting of the real numbers if
and only if it is provable in the theory.
.
- 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?
- References:
- Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- From: jackbatlin
- Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- Prev by Date: Re: Can ZFC prove Addition is Associative?
- Next by Date: Re: Can ZFC prove Addition is Associative?
- Previous by thread: Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- Next by thread: Re: Which theories hold a true but unprovable statement?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|