That’s not a flaw. It’s an amazing breakthrough.
It’s only a flaw for people who want to believe in some imaginary positivism.
Comment on So much...
nednobbins@lemmy.zip 4 weeks agoKurt Gödel wrote a whole paper on it.
He used math to show that all statements, in any language, can be expressed as math statements. He then proved that it’s impossible to create any cpnsistent set of math statements that completely describes everything.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
[deleted]technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
euclidean geometry is famously complete
Nah.
this doesn’t mean that “it’s impossible to create any consistent set of math statements that completely describes everything,”
It says far less than that: “It’s impossible for a mathematical system containing the natural numbers to be both complete and consistent.”
Reality has almost nothing to do with it.
reality itself could be a complete system, understandable from both the outside and inside if only viewed at the right angle…
This has been largely debunked.
hilbert’s dream is not dead yet,
I dunno what his dream was, but Hilbert’s program is very much dead.
rooroo@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
That doesn’t make it fundamentally flawed. I also can’t completely describe all muscle movement involved and yet I can walk.
Gödel’s incompleteness theorem has to be the most overhyped thing since a certain cat. For logicians, it mainly means that “is it probable” is a valid question for prepositions that are otherwise vastly esoteric in nature.