Re: Godel's Incompleteness theorem

Neilist <Neilisted@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

Give the correct definition then, genius (sarcasm)!

The correct definition has already been given: a theory is complete if
for every sentence, either the sentence is formally derivable or its
negation is.

Confusing for you, apparently.

What confusion do you have in mind?

Godel Escher Bach is great fun, and it eases the reader into Godel's
work.

_Gödel, Escher, Bach_ might well be great fun. As an exposition of the
incompleteness theorems it's not the best possible choice if one seeks
a clear general understanding of the incompleteness theorems and their
significance -- all sorts of pleasant reflections on self-reference
and so on, as inspired in many by Hofstadter's book, however valuable
in themselves, are in the end almost entirely irrelevant to any actual
mathematical and philosophical application of the incompleteness
theorems.

But is Franzen's work too sober = dry = boring? Or too advanced for
the original poster or to the average person?

Franzén's work is very readable and not at all dry.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxx)

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