tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post8000031707885429629..comments2023-10-26T14:41:46.244+02:00Comments on What is Written...: On Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems - A Distinction toward Complete SystemsDr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post-62427245251300072342017-10-01T09:36:18.206+02:002017-10-01T09:36:18.206+02:00While the Incompleteness people can be named Label...While the Incompleteness people can be named Labellists (contrary to Descriptivists) and in some other sense, Anti-Labellists (contrary to Labellists).<br /><br />Now that I've been reviewing it some more, I think we all are Compatibilists because of the respect for the unsolved issues in not falling back on complacency while also seeking a descriptive whole so that no area is left unchecked within the (academic) disciplines.<br /><br />Cheers!Dr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post-29320680927016837892013-08-09T08:39:48.147+02:002013-08-09T08:39:48.147+02:00Better formulation has now been entered.Better formulation has now been entered.Dr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post-84883301288174712982013-08-09T08:34:01.749+02:002013-08-09T08:34:01.749+02:00Reformulation of the 3 attacks against Gödel's...Reformulation of the 3 attacks against Gödel's Incompleteness:<br /><br /><b>The Attacks against Gödel's Incompleteness</b><br /><br /><i>1. Attack</i><br />The issue under "Limitations of Gödel's theorems" isn't whether "Gödel could use logics too", but whether<br /><br />1. y is the Gödel number of a formula and x is the Gödel number of a proof of the formula encoded by y <br />2. y is the Gödel number of a formula THEN <br />3. Bew(y) = ∃x (x is the Gödel number of a proof of the formula encoded by y) <br /><br />AND therefore DEFEATS<br /><br />Gödel's two theorems because the above completely describes the disposition of the field given, i.e., the disposition of logics, the UoD, by Everything (in Mathematics), entities and so on, all the way up to "the whole of mathematics and so on", best seen by<br /><br />"Bew(y) = ∃ x ( y is the Gödel number of a formula and x is the Gödel number of a proof of the formula encoded by y)",<br /><br />being the defeated part, under "Construction of a statement about "provability". So the war is on between Gödel/Gödel followers and Gödel critics, whereof I am one. This is the reason that Gödel stands against Tarski in the intellectual World today! But criticism has to be met and we'll see.<br /><br /><i>2. Attack</i><br />The Probable Solution to All Set Theory<br />'What is it to know? I have absolutely no idea! To "know" has been assigned to me!'<br />I think the set theory that breaks the Principia Mathematica can be solved by S = Ø (set of solution is empty)<br /><br /><i>The description:</i><br />One should remember that one object/member lower down the hypothetical chain of sets (by categories) triggers necessary objects/members all the way up to the "first natural level where one would otherwise see an empty set right below it". "The first natural level" can also be seen as "the deepest level" before, if any at all, the empty set can occur." "You can add all the (meaningless) categories/set containers you want under a natural set/one set that contains members, but where do you get when the bottom container is empty?<br /><br />Clearly, it's just rubbish and thus it's not a serious argument against the project that Principia Mathematica represents."<br />That is, by this explanation, that the maximal number of empty sets under the natural chain of sets, can only be 1, one, but usually is 0, zero, by the usual descriptions of commoners and non-mathematicians. This, thus, represents the final solution to set-theory for all time to come. Good?<br /><br />(Corroborative for knowledge: Out of 'I know nothing and my set is empty! Can you call illusions knowledge? I don't think so!')<br /><br /><i>3. Attack</i><br />One "unexplainable" smacker for Gödel<br /><br />One last smacker for Godel: All axioms are needed to establish a (logical) system - Premise<br />All axioms - Premise<br />-----------------------<br />Logical System - Cond. Elim. - Conclusion by Modus Ponens<br /><br />You can add the extra reiteration for classical premises, deduction and conclusion to obtain yourself.Dr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post-12057069599991448432012-06-25T06:07:36.922+02:002012-06-25T06:07:36.922+02:00Note still, please, that from being a "politi...Note still, please, that from being a "political victim/politically suppressed", I've only accomplished to make "outlines of ideas" and I am HARD on the claim that they are generally sufficient for crediting ME, as rightful, for the intellectual work, that indeed, MY genius has accomplished the above as with the rest, as my reputation so commonly is with some (semi-secret) parts of Norway and USA in particular, but also in other parts of the World! Thanks!!!Dr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767439602878972356.post-77290494902093359512012-06-24T14:15:50.037+02:002012-06-24T14:15:50.037+02:00You know, it is the bloody Blogger/Blogspot servic...You know, it is the bloody Blogger/Blogspot service that makes such a moron formatting as the above! Noted!<br /><br />Of course, the time-stamps relate to a note on Facebook and various texts entered under my profile! Cheers!Dr. Lukas F. Olsnes-Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00588900299772602295noreply@blogger.com