Re: Godel proved maths inconsistent not incompleteness theorem

On Mar 29, 10:35 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 2008-03-29, in sci.logic, Charlie-Boo wrote:

What are these usual proofs (other than the original)?


The proofs of the second incompleteness theorem that come to mind are
all variants of the original as set out in detail in Hilbert &
Bernays.

I just reduced the second incompleteness theorem to the always Halting
Problem. Is that a variant of the original as set out in detail in
Hilbert & Bernays?

C-B

How do we know they are of no use?

Robinson arithmetic is too weak to prove the derivability conditions.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi...@xxxxxxxxx)

"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
 - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

.