FOM: Goedel: truth and misinterpretations
Kanovei
kanovei at wmwap1.math.uni-wuppertal.de
Thu Nov 2 15:17:44 EST 2000
> From: "Matt Insall" <montez at rollanet.org>
> Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 04:56:16 -0800
> ... consider a similar statement to have meaning:
>
> (T) Even if the statement ``every even number greater than
> 2 is the sum of two primes'' is consistent relative to
> ZFC, then this fact may not be provable.
If T is assumed to be a mathematical statement then to have
meaning it has to be rewritten in accordance to mathematical
standards (and this is you who have to rewrite it), in particular,
I don't know how to interpret the ending
"this fact may not be provable" through any combination of
quantifiers.
If T is assumed to be ontological (that is, about some reality,
it is also your duty to specify how you view T)
then it is not more meaningful than
(T')
Even if the statement "unicorns exist" is consistent
relative to Darvin's concept of survivance of the fittest,
this fact may not be provable.
V.Kanovei
More information about the FOM
mailing list