Originally posted by RJHindsGodel's incompleteness theorem has no reference in it to circles. It is a formal proof concerning recursively defined arithmetics. It is the theory itself that is a closed system, not the thing about which the theory is. If the veracity of a statement cannot be proven within the logic of the theory we do an experiment to find the answer. The experiment is not part of the axiomatic system - so we can prove the veracity of a Godel statement by using experiment - up to the uncertainties inherent in the experimental method.
This argument has already been countered on a previous post of mine. I repeat:
Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proved that every system that could be enclosed within a circle depended on something different outside the circle that you have to assume but you can not prove. This means that there are always more things that are true than you can prove and an ...[text shortened]... re is a limitation to science if only naturalitic rules can be considered.
The Instructor
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThat's a bunch of crap.
Godel's incompleteness theorem has no reference in it to circles. It is a formal proof concerning recursively defined arithmetics. It is the theory itself that is a closed system, not the thing about which the theory is. If the veracity of a statement cannot be proven within the logic of the theory we do an experiment to find the answer. The experime ...[text shortened]... el statement by using experiment - up to the uncertainties inherent in the experimental method.
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsWe ALL know what you are really after. ANYTHING that helps you refute evolution and the age of the Earth. To that end you desperately troll the internet for bogus research you for some unknown reason think we are supposed to be swayed when it is clear every one of your youtube trolls are in the same boat, whether they are actual scientists or not, all voicing mere opinion and bringing up crap that has been refuted 100 times over but 1000 times over will not drive away you nutters. Your religious OCD has no place in a science forum.
That's a bunch of crap.
The Instructor
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't want to get in trouble on this forum by giving my interpretation and conclusion, so I will just point you to a wikipedia article on it and to a Youtube video series that gives the theorem in simplified terms and you can draw your own conclusions. The series is actually on the DNA Code and information systems, but I skip to where it explains Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem.
Please, tell us more about Gödel's incompleteness theorems and how we ought to interpret them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems
Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem and the Origin of the Universe
Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem and the Origin of the Universe part 2
The Existence and Nature of Information
Quick & Dirty Summary
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsI actually know a bit about Gödel's incompleteness theorems, having had training in formal logic. They are theorems that pertain to formal logic and don't have anything to do with DNA, life, the universe, etc. I'm not sure how you or the authors of those YouTube videos got that idea. Are you just looking up random articles in Wikipedia and then connecting them to evolution/DNA/Big Bang?
I don't want to get in trouble on this forum by giving my interpretation and conclusion, so I will just point you to a wikipedia article on it and to a Youtube video series that gives the theorem in simplified terms and you can draw your own conclusions. The series is actually on the DNA Code and information systems, but I skip to where it explains Gödel's I ...[text shortened]... cwzo
Quick & Dirty Summary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkRDbyygT04
The Instructor
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI will let the article and the video speak for themselves. Please interpret them in a scientific way if you can. I will make no other comments on it in this forum.
I actually know a bit about Gödel's incompleteness theorems, having had training in formal logic. They are theorems that pertain to formal logic and don't have anything to do with DNA, life, the universe, etc. I'm not sure how you or the authors of those YouTube videos got that idea. Are you just looking up random articles in Wikipedia and then connecting them to evolution/DNA/Big Bang?
The Instructor
Originally posted by KazetNagorraFormal logic is something I never had training in (hope it doesn't show 😉). I'd like to rectify that; is there a good book?
I actually know a bit about Gödel's incompleteness theorems, having had training in formal logic. They are theorems that pertain to formal logic and don't have anything to do with DNA, life, the universe, etc. I'm not sure how you or the authors of those YouTube videos got that idea. Are you just looking up random articles in Wikipedia and then connecting them to evolution/DNA/Big Bang?
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHinds
I will let the article and the video speak for themselves. Please interpret them in a scientific way if you can. I will make no other comments on it in this forum.
The Instructor
interpret them in a scientific way if you can.
Moron. How can a load of stupid creationist propaganda crap be interpreted in a “scientific way” 😛
Please keep your religion out of this SCIENCE forum.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtMy "traning in formal logic" is restricted to one course I followed during my bachelor's. I don't really feel qualified to recommend any particular book.
Formal logic is something I never had training in (hope it doesn't show 😉). I'd like to rectify that; is there a good book?
Originally posted by RJHindsAnd of course you don't think the incompleteness theory is a good weapon in your fight against real science, a religious stance. You are just interested in seeing the logic and the real scientific truth in the world and the universe, right?
None of that was creationist propaganda.
The Instructor
Originally posted by sonhouseRight. It is about truth. Why else should I bother?
And of course you don't think the incompleteness theory is a good weapon in your fight against real science, a religious stance. You are just interested in seeing the logic and the real scientific truth in the world and the universe, right?
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsSo it's you versus 300 years of the work of hundreds of thousands of scientists, every one atheist and having a deeply held secret religion destroying agenda. I wonder if they have secret handshakes and special tatoo's that shows them to be inner members of this vast horde of atheistic religion haters.
Right. It is about truth. Why else should I bother?
The Instructor
Originally posted by sonhouseYou should know. 😏
So it's you versus 300 years of the work of hundreds of thousands of scientists, every one atheist and having a deeply held secret religion destroying agenda. I wonder if they have secret handshakes and special tatoo's that shows them to be inner members of this vast horde of atheistic religion haters.
The Instructor