Re: what makes it true?

mareg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx () wrote:
>Timothy Little <tim-usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>And if it turns out that neither GC nor not-GC can be deduced from the
>>axioms...?
>
> Then we would know that GC was true.

Even though some model of the natural numbers may contain an even
number greater than two that is not a sum of two primes?

Which model do you take as the *real* one?



> I am not sure where this discussion is leading. The original
> question was something like "Can a mathematical statement be true
> without it having been proved?", and it still seems to me that the
> simple answer is yes. Do you disagree with that?

Yes.


> I don't think many people would argue that FLT was not true in 1980.

Possibly not many would. Most seem to believe that mathematical truth
is something to be discovered. Some think that mathematical truth is
something to be created.


- Tim
.