Date: Nov 18, 2012 4:08 PM
Author: Graham Cooper
Subject: Re: A HARD FLAW in Godel's Proof

On Nov 19, 1:14 am, forbisga...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 18, 2012 12:46:17 AM UTC-8, Graham Cooper wrote:
> > > On Nov 17, 10:10 pm, "INFINITY POWER" <infin...@limited.com> wrote:
> > > > STEP 1:  DEFINE a 2 parameter predicate DERIVE(THEOREM, DERIVATION)
> > > > DERIVE(T,D) is TRUE IFF
> > OK so the T/F PREDICATE
>
> > DERIVES(T,<t1, t2, t3, t4,,,,T>)
> > is easy to program!
>
> > ...As long as D is a given argument, for now.
>
> And always,
>


D is a finite length string, all the terms in D are from a fixed
alphabet or atleast countable.

The HYPOTHESIS which goes against "G=!proof(G)" being significant

is that:

for some suitably rich set of Axioms,
for every well formed formula F
exist <t1,t2,t3,,,,F>
or exist <t1 t2 t3,,,~F>

which would imply the existence of a halting thoerem decider.

Though it's complexity might be exponential anyway.

Herc