Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: How can NO LOGICIAN follow this argument??
Replies: 13   Last Post: Mar 5, 2013 11:06 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Graham Cooper Posts: 4,495 Registered: 5/20/10
How can NO LOGICIAN follow this argument??
Posted: Mar 3, 2013 12:43 AM

Look for the phrase CONSTRUCT-A-SENTENCE

> [DARYL]
> Fix a coding for arithmetic, that is, a way to associate a unique
> natural number with each statement of arithmetic. In terms of this
> coding, a truth predicate Tr(x) is a formula with the following
> property: For any statement S in the language of arithmetic,
> Tr(#S) <-> S
> holds (where #S means the natural number coding the sentence S).
> If Tr(x) is a formula of arithmetic, then using techniques
> developed by Godel, we can construct a sentence L such that
> L <-> ~Tr(#L)
>
> [JESSE]
> Goedel *explicitly* constructed a formula P and showed
> that both (1) and (2) were true of P.

[HERC]

"We can construct a formula"
/\
||
\/
"We can construct *ANY* formula"

T |- any formula

-----------------

Godel and Tarski proofs were PRE AXIOMATIC SET THEORY!

Herc
--
TOM: You can't agree with this!
BETTY: That's right!
PAMMY: I don't agree!

THE WOMEN'S INCOMPREHENSION THEORY!

Date Subject Author
3/3/13 Graham Cooper
3/3/13 Graham Cooper
3/3/13 Graham Cooper
3/3/13 Graham Cooper
3/4/13 Graham Cooper
3/4/13 Graham Cooper
3/4/13 Frederick Williams
3/4/13 Graham Cooper
3/5/13 Frederick Williams