The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: David Ullrich on Godel
Replies: 19   Last Post: Oct 11, 2012 7:02 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Virgil

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: David Ullrich on Godel
Posted: Oct 6, 2012 6:33 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <46756af8-2945-40d6-864e-c26de27f3307@googlegroups.com>,
Paul <pepstein5@gmail.com> wrote:

> David Ullrich used to append this quotation to his newsgroup postings:
>
> "Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
> That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
>
> Since I'm obsessed with following in full detail a rigorous account of
> Godel's theorems (I've yet to find one online which has the detail I want and
> where I don't get stuck on one of the steps), then obviously I must be doing
> completely the wrong thing, ullrichistically speaking.
>
> If following his formal proof is the wrong way to understand Godel, then what
> is a better way to understand Godel?
>
> Thank You,
>
> Paul Epstein


While following Godel's formal proof might still be considered
necessary, what David is saying is merely that it is not sufficient.
--





Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.