Newsgroups: sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.physics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!doug
From: doug@netcom.com (Doug Merritt)
Subject: Re: Godel: Is it too obvious to understand?
Message-ID: <dougDCwHs4.L1C@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <3vqnpb$7h3@mtnmath.com> <jqbDCrsoq.A6t@netcom.com> <400sh0$648@mtnmath.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 17:55:15 GMT
Lines: 15
Sender: doug@netcom16.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.logic:13628 comp.ai.philosophy:31331 sci.physics:133157

In article <400sh0$648@mtnmath.com> paul@mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik) writes:
>I did not say you can defeat Godel I said you can avoid him. It is
>totally trivial to write a nondeterministic process to explore every
>possible formal system. Godel's result only applies if a choice must
>be made between these alternatives. 

The union of those systems is an inconsistent system. For instance
consider if the first two of "every possible formal system" were (A)
with the axiom of choice, and (B) without the axiom of choice.
	Doug
-- 
Doug Merritt				doug@netcom.com
Professional Wild-eyed Visionary	Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow

Unicode Novis Cypherpunks Gutenberg Wavelets Conlang Logli Alife Anthro
Computational linguistics Fundamental physics Cogsci Egyptology GA TLAs
