Re: Godel proved maths inconsistent not incompleteness theorem

Charlie-Boo <shymathguy@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

On May 6, 10:22 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On May 6, 8:07 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
There are an infinite number of theorems generated in one step?
How?

Never heard of the axiom scheme of induction?  Or regularity?  Or
separation?

An axiom scheme is not an axiom.  Furthermore, if there can be an
infinite number of axioms, then we cannot write a proof generator in
general in the first place, as I said earlier.  This was the case I
had in mind.

Erm, yeah, you're a pretty smart guy and all, but...

There are complete proof generators.  Really, there are.  I know that
such trivial concepts as "dovetailing" never crossed your mind,

Now how do you know that?

How do I know what?

It appears as if you don't realize that there are complete theorem
provers. In fact, that's pretty much what you said.

I guess you didn't read how the DO and UNION rules work (ARXIV
paper.)

No, I didn't. So?

--
"The math doesn't care about their mortgages. It doesn't care about
their political needs. [...] Today's mathematicians have to hate
mathematics because mathematics doesn't look out for them. It doesn't
pay attention to their needs." --- JSH analyzes mathematicians
.