What is the meaning of Life, as we know it.

[TINNY]

Renderend invalid?

 

I think that is overdoing it a bit. Rather, the Principa Mathematica helped Goedel formulate his ideas.

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/principia-mathematica/

Tormod, the link does not touch on Godel's work at all. The main idea of the Principia was Russell's logicism. The significance of Godel's work was that he invalidated Russell's logicism (that mathematics can be fully derived from logic or sth like that). From wiki:

In mathematical logic, Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two celebrated theorems proved by Kurt Gödel in 1931. Somewhat simplified, the first theorem states:

 

In any consistent formalization of mathematics that is sufficiently strong to axiomatize the natural numbers -- that is, sufficiently strong to define the operations that collectively define the natural numbers -- one can construct a true (!) statement that can be neither proved nor disproved within that system itself.

 

This theorem is one of the most famous outside of mathematics, and one of the most misunderstood. It is a theorem in formal logic, and as such is easy to misinterpret. There are many statements that sound similar to Gödel's first incompleteness theorem, but are in fact not true, see misconceptions about Gödel's theorems below.

 

Gödel's second incompleteness theorem, which is proved by formalizing part of the proof of the first within the system itself, states:

 

No consistent system can be used to prove its own consistency.

why's nobody in this thread?

[IrishEyes]

why's nobody in this thread?

I was trying to stay away.

I read with my utmost best to comprehend and try to fit it into my jigsaw puzzle. but if I'm wrong (almost all the time), then so'll be it. I tend to give my general understanding of my readings since there are so many theories and facts. Maybe I've come to the wrong place and should find a better home on some other forum which I have seriously considered long ago.

no place for old wee tinny here huh?

 

Don't be silly. If there's no place for you, then there's no place for me either. I won't beg you to stay, you have a choice. But I enjoy your ideas, regardless of if I agree with them or not. It would be rather dull around here without you.

[Tormod]

i didn't say they are the building blocks. but basically, matter is formed from energy 'slowed down'. you know better. obfuscation based subterfuge?

 

Where did you get this idea? "Matter is slowed down energy"? I could perhaps agree that matter is condensed, low-level energy. :o Matter and energy come in many forms, though. I don't see how I try to hide anything.

 

you appreciate? you've hardly ever bothered to answer any of my posts in the past except the trivial ones on computers.

 

Thanks for your kind words. I will avoid comments.

 

I have however *explicitly* said I do not accept harunyahya as a scientific source, because it is based on religious dogma. For the same reason I do not accept Intelligent design ideas from Christian sources, either. Your quote shows many of the traits that underline the non-scientific aspect: assumptions that someone had a mystical insight many years ago which only now is "fully understood". This is, to put it bluntly, not science. It is religion and superstition.

 

Maybe I've come to the wrong place and should find a better home on some other forum which I have seriously considered long ago.

 

Then join other forums and see how it goes. Nobody is saying you can't be a member of several forums. We don't have a monopoly on being a science forum, Tinny.

[Tormod]

yeah, anything could happen. skepticism is the way to go! don't breath at all for a bird flu virus might infect you!

 

Sheesh.