Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


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

Topic: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Replies: 87   Last Post: Oct 25, 2013 2:44 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 1,968
Registered: 12/4/12
Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Posted: Oct 20, 2013 9:15 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 10/20/2013 2:11 AM, Nam Nguyen wrote:
> On 20/10/2013 12:34 AM, fom wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 1:25 AM, Nam Nguyen wrote:
>>> On 19/10/2013 11:51 PM, fom wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2013 12:04 AM, Nam Nguyen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you don't confirm, as you both haven't, then don't be a pathetic
>>>>> liar citing "available"-excuse here: you've never confirmed so I
>>>>> couldn't know if you didn't understand the definition, let alone
>>>>> knowing "available" would stand in the way of your understanding
>>>>> my definition.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you and Peter didn't understand my definition because of the
>>>>> word "available", _why the hell didn't your guys simply answer_
>>>>> _my request_ with something like "No, I don't understand your
>>>>> definition. Would you elaborate more"?
>>>>>

>>>>
>>>> Because both Peter and I are aware that there are specific
>>>> logics which address words like "impossible" and "know".
>>>>
>>>> We have explained that to you repeatedly at the expense of
>>>> our own time, only to be ignored and insulted.
>>>>
>>>> Since you seem to enjoy an impenetrable constitution
>>>> with regard to any ability to comprehend these facts,
>>>> I have moved on to the word "available". I have gone
>>>> back to the same questions that I had been asking before.
>>>> There had been no need to worry about your definition
>>>> because it has no substance.

>>>
>>>
>>>

>>>> Moreover, asking you to
>>>> elaborate on anything only leads to questions being
>>>> responded to with questions and other evasive techniques.

>>>
>>>
>>> You're a liar, fom. This is excerpted from the conversation:
>>>
>>> fom asked Nam:
>>>

>>> >>> And, the meaning of "impossible to know"?
>>>
>>> to which Nam directly respond:
>>>

>>> >>
>>> >> 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].

>>> >
>>> > Do you, fom, now understand my definition for the phrase "impossible
>>> > to know" in this context?
>>> >
>>> > Would you be able to confirm?

>>>
>>> I only asked you if you'd understand a definition that you yourself
>>> had challenged me to come up. What exactly did you find evasive in
>>> my definition and asking you to confirm above?
>>>
>>> For the record, if
>>>
>>> "resulting from all available definitions, permissible reasoning
>>> methods"
>>>
>>> is so difficult for you to comprehend, you could easily read that as:
>>>
>>> "resulting from [all available] definitions, permissible reasoning
>>> methods"
>>>
>>> where "[all available]" is just an optional helping annotation!
>>>
>>> If you don't understand such a simple expression in natural language
>>> (English) then I'm very sorry that you should disengage from my thread:
>>> there's not much I could help you, other than suggesting to you
>>> textbooks such as Shoenfield's would have a lot of similar technical
>>> but English expressions too.
>>>
>>> Again, if you don't understand the basic definitions of concepts I'd
>>> use against Godel's work, please disengage from thread.
>>>

>>
>> Do you not see the conditional in your statement?
>>
>> "...is said to be impossible to know *if* it's not
>> in the collection..."

>
> What specifically didn't you understand about the phrase?
>

>>
>> Hence the meaning of the statement relies on the
>> other part of the statement to which I referred.

>
> What specifically didn't you understand about the phrase?
>


I should ask the same of you.

A conditional statement consists of an antecedent
and a consequent. The "sense" of a consequent relies
on the "sense" of the antecedent to be meaningful.

In a formal system with rules for formal deductions
in a mutually exclusive, bivalent logic, the notion
of "sense" here corresponds to "truth".

In this case, the "sense" of "impossible to know"
is contingent on the "sense" of what follows in
your statement.

>>
>> And, Peter and I have continually asked about definitions
>> and reasoning methods in our pursuit of the meanings
>> ambiguously floating around this so-called "definition".

>
> If you don't know by now then I'll let you know. I've mentioned
> the phrase "FOL(=) reasoning framework" many ... many times.
> So one of the _prerequisites_ in this presentation is one should
> know enough about FOL(=) framework, including its permissible
> reasoning methods.
>


And, you have been informed by everyone that you are
not complying with the "permissible reasoning methods"
of first-order logic and the paradigm within which its
statements are understood.


> Shoenfield's would be one source you could look them up. And I'd
> suspect, say, Moeblee might suggest other books if you ask him.
>


I already own most of Moeblee's books.

There is at least one which he recommends that
I would recommend to no one. So much for your
appeal to authority.

>>
>> Answers are never forthcoming.>
>> And forthcoming answers never obtained.

>
> Again, if you don't know those FOL(=) framework permissible
> reasoning methods, please look them up elsewhere: I simply
> can't list them all for you here; and you're supposed to know
> at least enough of them that are relevant in this presentation.
>


Then list three.





Date Subject Author
10/4/13
Read The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/5/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/6/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
LudovicoVan
10/6/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
LudovicoVan
10/9/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work. (Halmos quote)
fom
10/18/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/18/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/19/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
namducnguyen
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Peter Percival
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/24/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/20/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
fom
10/25/13
Read Re: The Invalidity of Godel's Incompleteness Work.
Rock Brentwood

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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.