通信人家园

 找回密码
 注册

只需一步,快速开始

短信验证,便捷登录

搜索

军衔等级:

  少将

注册:2012-11-965

通信理论技术专家

跳转到指定楼层
1#
发表于 2023-6-3 05:22:54 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览
Dear colleagues,
I would like to declare that the famous Godel's incompleteness theorems with a 92 years history are wrong based on the following observations.
The equation (8.1) in [1] with the item "subst(y,19,number(y))" has a logical error in it.
Here, Godel supposes there is a formula with a free variable y, and also, he names the Godel number of this very formula as "y", which means he uses one symbol "y" for two different meanings, and formula y has been talking about itself from the first place, since Eq. (8.1) is actually the starting point of Godel's arguments.
If we allow one symbol has two different meanings, we can construct a liar-paradox in one step, just name the statement "Formula G is false" as G.
This error invalidates Godel's whole arguments.

[1] K. Go ̈del, “Uber formal unentscheidbare sa ̈tze der principia mathematica und verwandter Systeme I,” Monatshefte Fu ̈r Mathematik, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 173–198, 1931. English Translation "On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems" by Marin Hirzel, Nov. 27, 2000.
Sincerely Yours
Xuezhi Yang with ID 110108197007188995
IEEE Senior Member
Beijing, China
yangxuezhi@hotmail.com
eq81.png

举报本楼

本帖有 1 个回帖,您需要登录后才能浏览 登录 | 注册
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册 |

手机版|C114 ( 沪ICP备12002291号-1 )|联系我们 |网站地图  

GMT+8, 2024-11-23 08:02 , Processed in 0.212839 second(s), 19 queries , Gzip On.

Copyright © 1999-2023 C114 All Rights Reserved

Discuz Licensed

回顶部