
Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Posted:
Oct 19, 2013 1:39 PM


On 19/10/2013 11:32 AM, fom wrote: > On 10/19/2013 12:23 PM, Nam Nguyen wrote: >> On 19/10/2013 5:23 AM, Peter Percival wrote: >>> Nam Nguyen wrote: >>> >>>> What definition of "invalidity" were you referring to _here_ ? Mine? >>> >>> If you use the word "invalidity" is newsgroups called sci.logic and >>> sci.math then it should probably be with its usual technical meaning. If >>> you use it in another sense you should probably say what sense that is >>> right from the start. >> >> I already did in this very thread define one or two forms of invalidity >> for meta statements. If you don't remember then say so and I'll try to >> cite the post for you. >> >> In any rate, one of the forms is that: >> >> H => C >> >> where it's impossible to know the truth value of H given all available >> definitions, permissible reasoning methods within the underlying logic >> framework [FOL(=) in this case.] >> > > And, the meaning of "impossible to know"?
Right there: right in front of you.
_A meta truth_ is said to be impossible to know if it's not in the collection of meta truths, resulting from all available definitions, permissible reasoning methods, within the underlying logic framework [FOL(=) in this case].
  There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.
NYOGEN SENZAKI

