Re: Godel's Incompleteness Theorems

[James N Rose <***>]

Tim,

Here is my interpretation/argument:

Extant Premise: We have no other tool for expressing the nature
of existence (in such a way that we can navigate using mathematics)
than formalism.

Any formalism is incomplete in its ability to include absolute
proofs or references because the contexts will never be large
enough to identify absolute verifications/validations.

Conclusion:  We can talk in vague inferences and suppositions
about the universal/natural realm of things, but once we attempt
to name and formalize, we fall into the premise category and
become deficient in depiction.

[analog imagery:  a collapsed wave function cannot embody
all the aspects of the free-wave qm state.]

We are forever trapped in "undecidable propositions".


I reject and challenge certain crucial aspects of this,
absolutely and unequivocably.


Jamie