All Big Issues

# All proven maths statements cant be true-fron Godels theorem

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 5/20/2014 Category: Science Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 839 times Debate No: 55126
Debate Rounds (3)
 australias leading erotic poet colin leslie dean notes All proven maths statements cant be true-fron Godels theorem (if there is only one definition of truth in mathematics) godel proved that there are true mathematic statements which cant be proven http://www.scribd.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... ?Any effectively generated theory cap ?Any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. In particular, for any consistent, effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable in the theory (Kleene 1967, p. 250) For each consistent formal theory T having the required small amount of number theory ? provability-within-the-theory-T is not the same as truth; the theory T is incomplete.? this means then Godels theorem means All provable mathematics statements cant be true including his own theorem godel proved that there are true mathematic statements which cant be proven so that entails then that what ever a true mathematics statement is a condition on it being true must be that it cant be proven (if there is only one definition of truth in mathematics) that means then that all provable mathematic statements cant be true as a condition on being true is that it must be non-provable corollary Thus godel giving a proof of his theorem means his theorem cant be true as a condition on being true is that it must be non-provable This place godels theorem in a paradox Godels theorem is considered true but if it is true then it cant be true as he has proved his theorem but his theorem means then his theorem cant be true as a condition on being true is that it must be non-provableReport this Argument For something to be true, it must be provable, not un-provable. That is a highly flawed definition of truth. Btw, why are you so obsessed with Colin Dean, it get's so annoying. Stop talking about her on all of your debates.Report this Argument con says "For something to be true, it must be provable, not un-provable" please address these two points 1)godel proved http://en.wikipedia.org... "arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable" therefore your statement that "For something to be true, it must be provable" is wrong 2)godel proved "arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable" so by a simple use of logic it entails that for a mathematics statement to be trues a condition on it being true must be that it cant be proven that entails (if there is only one definition of truth in mathematics) All provable mathematics statements cant be true including his own theoremReport this Argument By the way you said it, you made it seem like you think for something to be true it must be un-provable, something can be true without being provable, but being unprovable isn't a requirement to be true, like you entailed.Report this Argument con says ", something can be true without being provable," thus as dean says so that entails then that what ever a true mathematics statement is a condition on it being true must be that it cant be proven (if there is only one definition of truth in mathematics) that means then that all provable mathematic statements cant be true as a condition on being true is that it must be non-provableReport this Argument Something CAN be true without being provable, but it's not a requirement to be true. There are plenty of things that are true and are provable.Report this Argument  