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: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Replies: 33   Last Post: Jul 15, 2013 7:20 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 88
Registered: 9/24/07
5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Posted: Dec 26, 2007 7:01 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

The Autralian philosopher Colin Leslie Dean points out Godels theorems are
invalid for 5 reasons: he uses the axiom ofreducibility- which is invalid,
he uses the axiom of choice, he constructs impredicative statements - which
are invalid ,he miss uses the theory of types, he falls into 3 paradoxes

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/books/philosophy/GODEL5.pdf



GÖDEL’S INCOMPLETENESS THEOREM. ENDS IN ABSURDITY OR MEANINGLESSNESS
GÖDEL IS A COMPLETE FAILURE AS HE ENDS IN UTTER MEANINGLESSNESS
CASE STUDY IN THE MEANINGLESSNESS OF ALL VIEWS
By
COLIN LESLIE DEAN
B.SC, B.A, B.LITT (HONS), M.A, B,LITT (HONS), M.A,
M.A (PSYCHOANALYTIC STUDIES), MASTER OF PSYCHOANALYTIC STUDIES, GRAD CERT
(LITERARY STUDIES)
GAMAHUCHER PRESS WEST GEELONG, VICTORIA AUSTRALIA
2007

A case study in the view that all views end in meaninglessness. As an
example of this is Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. Gödel is a complete
failure as he ends in utter meaninglessness. Godels theorems are invalid
for 5 reasons: he uses the axiom of reducibility- which is invalid, he
uses the axiom of choice, he constructs impredicative statements - which
are invalid ,he miss uses the theory of types, he falls into 3 paradoxes


Gödel used impedicative definitions- Russell and Ponicare rejected these
as they lead to paradox

Godel , K , On undecidable propositions of formal mathematical systems, in
The undecidable , M, Davis, Raven Press, 1965, p.63 )


AXIOM OF REDUCIBILITY
(1) Godel uses the axiom of reducibility axiom 1V of his system is the
axiom of reducibility “As Godel says “this axiom represents the axiom
of reducibility (comprehension axiom of set theory)” (K Godel , On
formally undecidable propositions of principia mathematica and related
systems in The undecidable , M, Davis, Raven Press, 1965,p.12-13)

. Godel uses axiom 1V the axiom of reducibility in his formula 40 where he
states “x is a formula arising from the axiom schema 1V.1 ((K Godel , On
formally undecidable propositions of principia mathematica and related
systems in The undecidable , M, Davis, Raven Press, 1965,p.21

“ [40. R-Ax(x) ≡ (∃u,v,y,n)[u, v, y, n <= x & n Var v & (n+1) Var u
& u Fr y & Form(y) & x = u ∃x {v Gen [[R(u)*E(R(v))] Aeq y]}]

x is a formula derived from the axiom-schema IV, 1 by substitution “
http://www.mrob.com/pub/math/goedel.html


( 2) “As a corollary, the axiom of reducibility was banished as
irrelevant to mathematics ... The axiom has been regarded as re-instating
the semantic paradoxes” -
http://mind.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/...107/428/823.pdf

2)“does this mean the paradoxes are reinstated. The answer seems to be
yes and no” - http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-825075-4.pdf )

3) It has been repeatedly pointed out this Axiom obliterates the
distinction according to levels and compromises the vicious-circle
principle in the very specific form stated by Russell. But The philosopher
and logician FrankRamsey (1903-1930) was the first to notice that the axiom
of reducibility in effect collapses the hierarchy of levels, so that the
hierarchy is entirely superfluous in presence of the axiom.
(http://www.helsinki.fi/filosofia/gts/ramsay.pdf)

4) Russell Ramsey and Witgenstein regarded it as illegitimate Russell
abandoned this axiom and many believe it is illegitimate and must be not
used in mathematics

Ramsey says

Such an axiom has no place in mathematics, and anything which cannot be
proved without using it cannot be regarded as proved at all.

This axiom there is no reason to suppose true; and if it were true, this
would be a happy accident and not a logical necessity, for it is not a
tautology. (THE FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS* (1925) by F. P. RAMSEY


--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutscience.com/group/sci.math/
More information at http://www.talkaboutscience.com/faq.html




Date Subject Author
12/26/07
Read 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/26/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
donstockbauer@hotmail.com
12/26/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Hero
12/26/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Uncle Archie Relf
12/26/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
David R Tribble
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
David R Tribble
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Porky Pig Jr
12/27/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
J. Antonio Perez M.
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/31/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
1/1/08
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Aatu Koskensilta
1/1/08
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Mark Nudelman
1/2/08
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Aatu Koskensilta
7/15/13
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Victor
7/15/13
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Victor
7/15/13
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Victor
7/15/13
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Victor
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Michel Hack
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Hero
12/29/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Aatu Koskensilta
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
galathaea
12/28/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
elsiemelsi
12/29/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Hero
12/30/07
Read Re: 5 Reasons why Godels incompleteness theorem invalid
Zim Olson

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.