My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.

It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
because they are erroneous.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/23 10:00 PM, olcott wrote:
> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>
> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
> because they are erroneous.
>
>

So, you don't understand that G in F doesn't "asserts its own
unprovability in F", it asserts that there is no number "g" that
satisfies a specific Primitive Recursive Relationship.

That knowledge only exist in the Meta-F that produced that PRR.

So, your argument is just based on LIES, like all your logic.

But of course, the core of the problem is you don't understand what
"meta-theory" is about.

Or even how logic actually works.

Because you are so stupid.

On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>
> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
> because they are erroneous.
>
>

The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
....there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...
....We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
unprovability. 15 ...
(Gödel 1931:43-44)

Gödel, Kurt 1931.
On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
Related Systems

https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>
>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>> because they are erroneous.
>>
>>
>
> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
> unprovability. 15 ...
> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
> Related Systems
>
> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>
>

This proves that Gödel 1931 Incompleteness is anchored in
self-contradiction
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/23 10:54 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>
>>
>
> This proves that Gödel 1931 Incompleteness is anchored in
> self-contradiction
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
>
>

Nope, it proves that you don't know what you are talking about and are
just a stupid liar.

You don't understand what he is saying here, it is above your head.

You don't even understand the Reader's Digest version it seems.

Too bad you have ruined your life.

Still watching that kiddie porn? or did they take it away from you?

On 10/16/2023 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>
>>
>
> This proves that Gödel 1931 Incompleteness is anchored in
> self-contradiction
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...

Why would Gödel say this?

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>
>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>> because they are erroneous.
>>
>>
>
> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
> unprovability. 15 ...
> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
> Related Systems
>
> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>
>

*Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
*often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
*unresolvable contradiction*
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy

Quoted from above
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...

Why would Gödel say this?

The fact that you found a loophole in Carol's
question proves that you can analyze things.

I let the PhD computer science professor know
about this loophole.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>
>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>> because they are erroneous.
>>
>>
>
> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
> unprovability. 15 ...
> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
> Related Systems
>
> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf

>

*Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
*often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
*unresolvable contradiction*
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy

Quoted from above
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...

Why would Gödel say this?

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>
>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>> because they are erroneous.
>>
>>
>
> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
> unprovability. 15 ...
> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
> Related Systems
>
> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>
>
>

*Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
*often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
*unresolvable contradiction*
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy

Quoted from above
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...

Why would Gödel say this?
--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>
>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>> because they are erroneous.
>>
>>
>
> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its own
> unprovability. 15 ...
> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
> Related Systems
>
> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>
>

*Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
*often used in logic and epistemology, when describing a paradox or*
*unresolvable contradiction*
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy

Quoted from above
....14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...

Why would Gödel say this?
You have good analytical skills try and provide
some reasoning.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/17/23 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>
>>
>
> *Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
> mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
> *often used in logic and epistemology, when describing a paradox or*
> *unresolvable contradiction*
> https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy
>
> Quoted from above
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
>
> Why would Gödel say this?
> You have good analytical skills try and provide
> some reasoning.
>
>
Because he is smarter than you and knows how to transform statements.

Your just repeating yourself is shown your stupidity. You seem to think
that the disinformational technique of repeating the lie until people
think it is true is valid logic.

You are just showing your stupidity.

You really are.

On 10/16/23 11:42 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>
>>
> >
>
> *Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
> mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
> *often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
> *unresolvable contradiction*
> https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy
>
> Quoted from above
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
>
> Why would Gödel say this?

Because he is smarter than you and knows how to transform statements.

Your just repeating yourself is shown your stupidity. You seem to think
that the disinformational technique of repeating the lie until people
think it is true is valid logic.

You are just showing your stupidity.

On 10/16/23 11:42 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>
> >
>
> *Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
> mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
> *often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
> *unresolvable contradiction*
> https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy
>
> Quoted from above
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
>
> Why would Gödel say this?
>

Because he is smarter than you and knows how to transform statements.

Your just repeating yourself is shown your stupidity. You seem to think
that the disinformational technique of repeating the lie until people
think it is true is valid logic.

You are just showing your stupidity.

On 10/16/23 11:36 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>
>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>> similar undecidability proof...
>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>
>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>> Related Systems
>>
>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>
>>
>
> *Antinomy* (Greek αντι-, against, plus νομος, law) literally means the
> mutual incompatibility, real or apparent, of two laws. It is a term
> *often used in logic and epistemology*, *when describing a paradox or*
> *unresolvable contradiction*
> https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Antinomy
>
> Quoted from above
> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
> undecidability proof...
>
> Why would Gödel say this?\

Because he is smarter than you and knows how to transform statements.

>
> The fact that you found a loophole in Carol's
> question proves that you can analyze things.
>
> I let the PhD computer science professor know
> about this loophole.
>

On 10/16/23 11:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2023 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2023 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/16/2023 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> My unique take on Gödel 1931 Incompleteness (also self-referential)
>>>> Any expression of the language of formal system F that asserts its
>>>> own unprovability in F to be proven in F requires a sequence of
>>>> inference steps in F that prove they themselves do not exist.
>>>>
>>>> It is not at all that F is in any way incomplete.
>>>> It is simply that self-contradictory statements cannot be proven
>>>> because they are erroneous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> The most important aspect of Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness theorem are
>>> these plain English direct quotes of Gödel from his paper:
>>> ...there is also a close relationship with the “liar” antinomy,14 ...
>>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
>>> similar undecidability proof...
>>> ...We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts its
>>> own unprovability. 15 ...
>>> (Gödel 1931:43-44)
>>>
>>> Gödel, Kurt 1931.
>>> On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And
>>> Related Systems
>>>
>>> https://mavdisk.mnsu.edu/pj2943kt/Fall%202015/Promotion%20Application/Previous%20Years%20Article%2022%20Materials/godel-1931.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This proves that Gödel 1931 Incompleteness is anchored in
>> self-contradiction
>> ...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
>> undecidability proof...
>
> Why would Gödel say this?
>

Because it is true.

You are just to dumb to understand his arguments transforms the
epistemological antimony into something else, that isn't one.

The transformed sentence is no longer a contradiction, but becomes a
proof that something is True but unprovable.