About Gödel incompleteness theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter felipecoirolo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Godel Theorem
AI Thread Summary
Gödel's incompleteness theorem highlights that within any consistent formal system that includes basic arithmetic, there are statements that cannot be proven or disproven. The mention of multiplication alongside addition is significant because multiplication cannot always be derived from addition in every formal system, as illustrated by Presburger Arithmetic, which is complete and decidable without multiplication. The discussion also clarifies that simply adding undecidable statements to a set of axioms does not resolve the incompleteness issue; a new undecidable statement will always emerge. This mirrors Cantor's diagonal argument, where adding a newly constructed number to a list of reals does not make the list complete. The conversation emphasizes the inherent limitations of formal systems as established by Gödel's findings.
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!
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top