Re: Godel Contradiction

(so "reply to author " means actually email it, ok I won't do that,
thought it might have meant private message.)

1+1=2. if you invent a very long and comlpicated "proof" that 1+1=3,
you cannot appeal to the "complexity" of the proof, to dismiss
"simplistic" objections from the "layman" when he says "1+1=3 looks
wrong to me".

Its up to you, to avoid insults and show him where he is wrong.

by your own admission you don't know whether Godel's result is correct
or not since as you say


"I don't, to a mathematical certainty as verified by my own witness
of
the proof steps, assert that it is true. On the other hand, given
that
I know of no challenge in the literature to the quite common
statement
that such a proof does exist, I think it is reasonable to surmise
that
it does"

argument ad hominem used to make the "flat earth theory" seem
reasonable.

within those exact details (that you are personally missing) of the
proof , you cannot rule out the possibility that there may be a flaw.

I HAVE seen challenges to it, but anyone who submits a paper
challenging it, is regarded as a crackpot and their paper is not even
read! One professor of logic emailed me regarding his experience
regarding this predjudice.

Since not all logicians agree about the correctness of Godel's
incompleteness theorem and Since I personally do not have the formal
training in, or knowledge of, logic, I am therefore between a rock and
a hard place in this regard,

Since my ONLY reason for undertaing the arduous task of learning
formal logic, PA and ZFC etc would be to be able to follow every
detail of Godel's proof for myself, I would consider it an awful waste
of my time if I were to discover that Godel was in fact wrong,
particularly in view of the fact that "believers" would not bother to
look at such an argument. of course I might find Godel's proof to be
correct and I would find that gratifying. (but I'd first have to know
what the hell is *MEANT* by the godel 'statement')

As it is Neither you nor I have any right to rule out the possibility
of Godel's proof being incorrect despite the fact that many (or even
most -it doesn't matter) logicians claim it to be correct.

such parroting and argument ad hominem is just a waste of time.



I AM sure however, that I regard the sentences:
(in ANY system you care to choose)

"~decidable(G)"
and "~decidable(~decidable(G))"
and "~decidable(~decidable(~decidable(~decidable(G))))"
etc as being utter gibberish that doesn't get around to stating
anything at all.

I'm NOT just being argumentative here, I REALLY think they are
meaningless, I'm willing to concede the possibility that I may be
wrong about that BUT if you honestly perceive those statements as
meaningful then PLEASE show me how that is the case.

I do not believe you can do this. which is why I suspect that you will
fudge and dodge this paritcular question with disparaging insults
perhaps but I predict you will avoid addressing this one particular
issue.

and I'm not sure the statement ~decidable( ~decidable(G) )
is any different from the statement ~decidable("~decidable(G)")


and I don't see how coding the "meaning" of the statement into numbers
(big ones or otherwise) can have any bearing on that fact.


in the meantime you can take a look at THIS guy, he seems to know what
he's talking about regarding this (though you are probably in a better
position than me to understand what he is saying)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hannah and GAs sisters... (Woody Allen reference)
    ... No female friends at all? ... and will start biting the owner for a random reason. ... It's not reasonable to regard men as lottery tickets. ... our maker has blesses us with in the way that's best for all of us?" ...
    (soc.men)
  • Accesing structures data (getting lengthy!)
    ... > assignment statement just won't stand out amongst all the other ... > meaningless dummy variables that you have to keep track of. ... > comparitively easy to pick out of a long, boring, command line history, ... > original, for some reason, wraps me up in knots. ...
    (comp.soft-sys.matlab)
  • Re: Waiting to thread exit
    ... There is no reason to create the thread ... Why not just set the bounds of the progress bar to the file size? ... There is always something suspect if you ever look for GetExitCodeThread. ... But in this case, it is completely meaningless, because this code is ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)
  • Re: RSA Challenges
    ... Try reserving the margin's open type and James will nominate you! ... with regard to widespread holes. ... reason. ... molecular emotional stamps. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Newspaper machines
    ... reason, I have trouble reconciling the waste all these newspapers add ... But I also like that the WSJ comes to me every day without regard to ... What's the big difference to you from reading the WSJ on the Kindle as ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)