Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


byron
Posts:
891
Registered:
3/3/09


a logical flaw in godels proof  thus proof meaninglessness
Posted:
Jun 7, 2013 4:55 AM


australias leading erotic poet colin leslie dean points out a logical flaw in godels proof which makes his proof meaninglessness an axiom in the system godel uses ie axiom of reducibility AR bans his G statement
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32970323/Godelsincompletenesstheoreminvalidillegitimate
IT SHOULD BE NOTED Godel sentence G is outlawed by the very axiom he uses to prove his theorem ie the axiom of reducibiility thus his proof is invalidand thus godel commits a flaw by useing it to prove his theorem
http://www.enotes.com/topic/Axiom_of_reducibility
russells axiom of reducibility was formed such that impredicative statements where banned
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32970323/Godelsincompletenesstheoreminvalidillegitimate
but godels uses this AR axiom in his incompleteness proof ie axiom 1v and formular 40
and as godel states he is useing the logic of PM ie AR
?P is essentially the system obtained by superimposing on the Peano axioms [b]the logic of PM[/b]? ie AR
now godel constructs an impredicative statement G which AR was meant to ban
The impredicative statement Godel constructs is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
?the corresponding Gödel sentence G asserts: ?G cannot be proved to be true within the theory T??
now godels use of AR bans godels G statement
thus godel cannot then go on to give a proof by useing a statement his own axiom bans but by doing so he invalidates his whole proof and his proof/logic is flawed
we have a dilemma
DILEMMA 1) if godel is useing AR then he cannot use G as it is outlawed thus his proof collapses 2) if godel is not useing AR then he is lying when he tells us he is and thus his theorem cannot be about PM and related systems



