About Gödel incompleteness theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter felipecoirolo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Godel Theorem
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Gödel's incompleteness theorem, specifically addressing the relevance of multiplication in axiomatic systems and the implications of adding undecidable sentences. Multiplication is significant because it cannot always be derived from addition, as highlighted by Presburger Arithmetic. The conversation also clarifies that adding undecidable sentences to a consistent recursive list of axioms does not resolve the incompleteness issue, as demonstrated by Cantor's diagonal argument, which parallels Gödel's findings that every recursive list of axioms will always miss at least one Gödel sentence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gödel's incompleteness theorem
  • Familiarity with Presburger Arithmetic
  • Knowledge of Cantor's diagonal argument
  • Basic concepts of axiomatic systems in mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Gödel's original proof of incompleteness
  • Explore the implications of Presburger Arithmetic in formal systems
  • Investigate the relationship between decidability and completeness in mathematical logic
  • Examine further examples of Gödel sentences in various axiomatic systems
USEFUL FOR

Amateur mathematicians, students of mathematical logic, and anyone interested in the foundational aspects of mathematics and the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorem.

felipecoirolo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm a starting amateur mathematician. I'm studying Gödel's incompleteness theorem and have a couple of rookie questions that I can't seem to sort out.
1) In the text I'm reading it talks repeatedly about systems containing "addition and multiplication". Since multiplication can be derived from addition, why is it relevant to mention multiplication?
2) If the G sentence is added to the set of axioms, there will be always another sentence G' that is undecidable, and if this one is added then there will be a G'', G''', etc. If there appears to be a systematic way of building this sentences, why it is not valid to include axioms to build all this kind of sentences?
Thanks in advanced! The subject is thrilling and I'm looking forward to read and learn much more.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1) See Presburger Arithmetic; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presburger_arithmetic. Multiplication is not necessarily definable from addition. Note that this theory is demonstrably complete, consistent, and decidable.

2) In Cantor's diagonal argument for the uncoutability of the reals, one starts with a countable list of real numbers and gives a construction of a number not on the list, demonstrating that no countable list of real numbers is complete. Simply adding the constructed number to the list doesn't "fix" the problem.

Similarly Gödel's proof shows that for every consistent recursive list of axioms there is at least one statement which cannot be proven or disproven. Adding all of those statements as axioms, even in a recursive way, doesn't solve that problem. You still "end up" with a recursive list with its own Gödel sentence. Or to put it another way, every recursive list of Gödel sentences must be missing at least one Gödel sentence, just like every countable list of real numbers is missing at least one real number.
 
Superb answer. Thanks a million gopher!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K