Re: Godel proved maths inconsistent not incompleteness theorem

On Mar 14, 11:05 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Mar 14, 9:09 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Right.  You've got him beat.  You've come up with *lots* of great
theorems, so what does it matter that your logic is an utterly
incoherent mess?  

That's right.  The proof is in the pudding.  CBL generates incredibly
short proofs, incredibly large numbers of proofs, new proofs, and
nobody has found anything wrong with any of the proofs.  All you can
say is you don't like the way it's described?

Right.  That's the only complaint.  Nothing wrong with any of the
proofs, aside from that pesky bit that only you know what counts as a
proof.

Why is the state of my mind a criterion for the evaluation of the
proofs?

Why has nobody (including yourself) shown anything wrong with them?

Say, how's that work on David Ullrich's request coming along?

Write a prgram to syntax check proofs? Why? Here's an article that I
just posted that contains a computer program that generates (lists) 27
theorems, including Turing's. See, there is no need for a syntax
checker, as the program creates the syntax.

http://selfref.googlegroups.com/web/A%20Simple%20Generator%20of%20Incompleteness%20Theorems.pdf?gda=bZpdZmIAAABKoXd3YYWlwzs5jhTuo_69bdyKLS1yWoc87NTQq7lfpWG1qiJ7UbTIup-M2XPURDQzSDmKMzn3Sg8-2GbVvdi117y3W4zJ8GbL7WWaTD9l9Ko2dOZBEuzU2DVNzz0QUbvKHSFV3pq93kT4KvIWNWYO&hl=en

(Boyer and Moore claim that they ran a proof of one theorem of
Turing's through a syntax checker to "verify the proof." But that
only says that the user entered in the right syntax for some proof.
That doesn't say anything about what the proof proves or anything
about the halting problem. What's the point?)

(BTW Did you know that Boyer and Moore only represent Propositional
Calculus, no Predicate Calculus wffs at all? Yet they proved the
unsolvability of the Halting Problem? How does one prove any set not
recursive - using Predicate Calculus, of all things?)

Has he written any programs to generate theorems, I wonder? That
would be useful.

C-B

--
One these mornings gonna wake    | Ain't nobody's doggone business how
     up crazy,                   |     my baby treats me,              
Gonna grab my gun, kill my baby. | Nobody's business but mine.    
Nobody's business but mine.      |  -- Mississippi John Hurt

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Contradiction or paradox
    ... "If you claim to have a formal system, then you should be able to ... justified by theorems proven in theory of computability (or whatever ... you need to at least start by specifying a proof syntax that does not ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: My talk about Godel to the post-grads.
    ... Godel's theorems to issues outside arithmetic. ... he could not argue that the completeness of systems ... can only be delivered through both syntax AND subjectivity. ... Maybe, with Godel, we don't want to be regarded as machines AND, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Existence as predicate
    ... In Predicate Calculus there is a metalogical assumption that ... > course there are some theorems, ... Actually, there are systems of Free Logic (slight variants of PCI), ... Hence there we c a n stipulate ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: A good book
    ... predicate calculus and elegant code ... it's frequently stated that relational databases operate on a solid mathematical foundation. ... Are there theorems of relational theory that suggest certain program transformations, ... He used it as an example of greater elegance. ...
    (comp.databases.theory)
  • Re: A good book
    ... predicate calculus and elegant code ... it's frequently stated that relational databases operate ... practice for reasoning about behavior, transformations, correctness, ... Are there theorems of relational theory that suggest certain program ...
    (comp.databases.theory)