Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 16:14:20 02/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
I would argue that my definition isn't spin but a reasonable take on the foundations of Formal Mathematics :) But I have to agree that it reduces to roughly the same structure. But there are really neat and random things hidden in the Garden of Numbers. One is what constitutes an accepted Axiom. Another is the Gödel/Turing discoveries of incompleteness of Axiomatic systems. Gödels proof is a beauty. But Turings algorithmic theories makes the principle easier to grok. Thirdly the examination by Chaitin on the randomness of Arithmetics. There is obviously an aggregation of knowledge that lies outside the formal framework at work. That's what makes it useful to have a philosophy of knowledge. MvH Dan Andersson
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.