|
|
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
|
|
