An example of incompleteness?Understanding Gödel's Incompleteness TheoremConsequences of Incompleteness.Expressibility; Incompleteness of Peano Arithmeticdiagonalization about incompletenessGödels incompleteness vs incompletenessConcerning the canonical example for Gödel's first incompleteness theoremGödel's Incompleteness Theorems proofGödel's second incompleteness theoremsHow can a formal system ever be non-obviously unsound?What is the purpose of Semantics/Model theory in Mathematical Foundations?
"to be prejudice towards/against someone" vs "to be prejudiced against/towards someone"
Have astronauts in space suits ever taken selfies? If so, how?
To string or not to string
Why can't I see bouncing of a switch on an oscilloscope?
Can a Warlock become Neutral Good?
Service Entrance Breakers Rain Shield
What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?
Do I have a twin with permutated remainders?
Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?
Theorem, big Paralist and Amsart
Fencing style for blades that can attack from a distance
How to say job offer in Mandarin/Cantonese?
How to find program name(s) of an installed package?
Which models of the Boeing 737 are still in production?
What does it mean to describe someone as a butt steak?
Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?
I’m planning on buying a laser printer but concerned about the life cycle of toner in the machine
How to test if a transaction is standard without spending real money?
Why does Kotter return in Welcome Back Kotter?
What is the word for reserving something for yourself before others do?
Risk of getting Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in the United States?
Why doesn't H₄O²⁺ exist?
TGV timetables / schedules?
Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?
An example of incompleteness?
Understanding Gödel's Incompleteness TheoremConsequences of Incompleteness.Expressibility; Incompleteness of Peano Arithmeticdiagonalization about incompletenessGödels incompleteness vs incompletenessConcerning the canonical example for Gödel's first incompleteness theoremGödel's Incompleteness Theorems proofGödel's second incompleteness theoremsHow can a formal system ever be non-obviously unsound?What is the purpose of Semantics/Model theory in Mathematical Foundations?
$begingroup$
Is it fair to suggest that the fact a base's symbol which would exist in a higher base but is never truly reflected in the base itself is an example(see below) of incompleteness along the ideas of the theorems? My apologies as I'm mostly self-teaching in these areas and feel I've skipped a lot of interim understanding. I don't know logic notation yet so can't follow any raw work. My example would be as follows;
In binary, base 2, we only ever feature the numbers 0 and 1 in all our numerical representations. Despite the fact it's base 2 the numerical symbol of 2 itself never actually appears in this system as this is instead 10.
Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness? Have I just made a random naive or arbitrary correction or is this a fair conclusion of sorts, if even very simplistic? Thanks in advance.
number-theory logic incompleteness
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
$endgroup$
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Is it fair to suggest that the fact a base's symbol which would exist in a higher base but is never truly reflected in the base itself is an example(see below) of incompleteness along the ideas of the theorems? My apologies as I'm mostly self-teaching in these areas and feel I've skipped a lot of interim understanding. I don't know logic notation yet so can't follow any raw work. My example would be as follows;
In binary, base 2, we only ever feature the numbers 0 and 1 in all our numerical representations. Despite the fact it's base 2 the numerical symbol of 2 itself never actually appears in this system as this is instead 10.
Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness? Have I just made a random naive or arbitrary correction or is this a fair conclusion of sorts, if even very simplistic? Thanks in advance.
number-theory logic incompleteness
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
2
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
1
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
2
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Is it fair to suggest that the fact a base's symbol which would exist in a higher base but is never truly reflected in the base itself is an example(see below) of incompleteness along the ideas of the theorems? My apologies as I'm mostly self-teaching in these areas and feel I've skipped a lot of interim understanding. I don't know logic notation yet so can't follow any raw work. My example would be as follows;
In binary, base 2, we only ever feature the numbers 0 and 1 in all our numerical representations. Despite the fact it's base 2 the numerical symbol of 2 itself never actually appears in this system as this is instead 10.
Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness? Have I just made a random naive or arbitrary correction or is this a fair conclusion of sorts, if even very simplistic? Thanks in advance.
number-theory logic incompleteness
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
$endgroup$
Is it fair to suggest that the fact a base's symbol which would exist in a higher base but is never truly reflected in the base itself is an example(see below) of incompleteness along the ideas of the theorems? My apologies as I'm mostly self-teaching in these areas and feel I've skipped a lot of interim understanding. I don't know logic notation yet so can't follow any raw work. My example would be as follows;
In binary, base 2, we only ever feature the numbers 0 and 1 in all our numerical representations. Despite the fact it's base 2 the numerical symbol of 2 itself never actually appears in this system as this is instead 10.
Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness? Have I just made a random naive or arbitrary correction or is this a fair conclusion of sorts, if even very simplistic? Thanks in advance.
number-theory logic incompleteness
number-theory logic incompleteness
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
edited Mar 19 at 11:16
Rummy
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
asked Mar 19 at 11:06
RummyRummy
245
245
2
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
2
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
1
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
2
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01
|
show 4 more comments
2
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
2
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
1
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
2
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01
2
2
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
2
2
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
1
1
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
2
2
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01
|
show 4 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Incompleteness (in the logical sense) is not about representation of mathematical objects. Rather, it concerns the relation of truth and provability in mathematics, where the latter concepts are understood in a specific technical sense.
There is no good metaphor which fully capture it. Douglas Hofstadter made an attempt in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which I recommend.
My advice is to begin by learning formal logic. Otherwise, it will be like trying to understand quantum physics without learning calculus or any other physics.
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3153922%2fan-example-of-incompleteness%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Incompleteness (in the logical sense) is not about representation of mathematical objects. Rather, it concerns the relation of truth and provability in mathematics, where the latter concepts are understood in a specific technical sense.
There is no good metaphor which fully capture it. Douglas Hofstadter made an attempt in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which I recommend.
My advice is to begin by learning formal logic. Otherwise, it will be like trying to understand quantum physics without learning calculus or any other physics.
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Incompleteness (in the logical sense) is not about representation of mathematical objects. Rather, it concerns the relation of truth and provability in mathematics, where the latter concepts are understood in a specific technical sense.
There is no good metaphor which fully capture it. Douglas Hofstadter made an attempt in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which I recommend.
My advice is to begin by learning formal logic. Otherwise, it will be like trying to understand quantum physics without learning calculus or any other physics.
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Incompleteness (in the logical sense) is not about representation of mathematical objects. Rather, it concerns the relation of truth and provability in mathematics, where the latter concepts are understood in a specific technical sense.
There is no good metaphor which fully capture it. Douglas Hofstadter made an attempt in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which I recommend.
My advice is to begin by learning formal logic. Otherwise, it will be like trying to understand quantum physics without learning calculus or any other physics.
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
$endgroup$
Incompleteness (in the logical sense) is not about representation of mathematical objects. Rather, it concerns the relation of truth and provability in mathematics, where the latter concepts are understood in a specific technical sense.
There is no good metaphor which fully capture it. Douglas Hofstadter made an attempt in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which I recommend.
My advice is to begin by learning formal logic. Otherwise, it will be like trying to understand quantum physics without learning calculus or any other physics.
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
edited Mar 19 at 11:46
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
answered Mar 19 at 11:29
Daniel AhlsénDaniel Ahlsén
3965
3965
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
$begingroup$
Thanks Daniel, now the 6th recommendation to me for that book and ironicially one that was brought up by my friend when I tried to think about this with him.
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 19 at 11:35
1
1
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
The book is very good. It was an inspiration for becoming a mathematician.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 19 at 15:50
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
I have started on the Peano axioms/logic which will eventually go a long way. Unfortunately I know a few physicists already and do understand more about quantum physics than I should! I was formally educated in maths and physics until 18 though. Tbh I'm long term chasing maths that naturally crosses over (just for the enjoyment tbh)
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:41
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Are you able to translate the incompleteness problem onto a more plaintext argument for a layman? Thats what im struggling with. I understand it to the extent of essentially that a formally rigid and complete system cannot be accurate because it has no room to deal with undefined terms, whereas an incomplete system can deal with and address unknowns due to iterative processes and thus it can be accurate, but it has to be incomplete because by definition because we cannot define the unknown until its...somewhat known?
$endgroup$
– Rummy
Mar 28 at 7:52
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
$begingroup$
Incompleteness is not about terms, knowledge or rigidity. It is about the possibility establishing the truth of arithmetical propositions via formal proofs. What it states is the following. If a formal system is such that (1) it's consistent, (2) it is strong enough to describe (a fragment of) Peano arithmetic, then (3) it cannot prove it's own consistency.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Ahlsén
Mar 28 at 8:21
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3153922%2fan-example-of-incompleteness%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
"random naive" seems to sum it up pretty well.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 19 at 11:16
$begingroup$
The word incompleteness,as it is usually used, doesn't have much to do with symbols
$endgroup$
– Max
Mar 19 at 11:16
2
$begingroup$
"Is this an example of the theories of incompleteness?" No. It has nothing at all to do with incompleteness in the logical sense. The binary number system is perfectly capable of expressing all natural numbers. There is nothing surprising in the observation that in any base, there is a limit to what can be expressed with a single digit number. On the other hand, the incompleteness theorems were very surprising indeed.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:18
1
$begingroup$
Having said that, there is a weak analogy in what you suggest, and analogies, even if weak, can potentially aid intuition, as long as you don't press the analogy too far.
$endgroup$
– John Coleman
Mar 19 at 11:29
2
$begingroup$
You are conflating objects and symbols. The number two is the object that has the symbol $2$ as name in the decimal system and the symbol $10$ as name in the binary system.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Mar 19 at 13:01