FOM: Goedel: truth and misinterpretations
Martin Davis
martin at eipye.com
Thu Oct 26 13:47:41 EDT 2000
At 07:06 PM 10/26/00 +0200, Kanovei wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 09:26:58 -0700
> > From: Martin Davis <martin at eipye.com>
>
> > I can't imagine what would be clearer than an assertion
> > that a has a
> > solution in natural numbers.
> >
>
>Most assured you cannot be wrong, I only wonder why they
>included the Harrington-Paris note as the only
>(or one of very few) pure research article in the
>"Handbook of Math. Logic", whose (the H-P note) main
>content was to display a true MATHEMATICALLY meaningful
>sentence of PA, not provable in PA.
The Paris-Harrington theorem provides an example of a mathematically
INTERESTING result not provable in PA. Perhaps when you say that an
assertion is "meaningful" you mean that it is one that mathematicians would
a priori tend to find interesting. The Paris-Harrington theorem and some
of Harvey Friedman's recent results are of this kind, while the perfectly
MEANINGFUL results coming from the work on Hibert's 10th problem clearly
are not.
Martin
Martin Davis
Visiting Scholar UC Berkeley
Professor Emeritus, NYU
martin at eipye.com
(Add 1 and get 0)
http://www.eipye.com
More information about the FOM
mailing list