Right. And even less than complete models can run afoul of Godel, e.g. if I created a
model of myself. It might be an accurate model, but I couldn't know that it was. On the
other hand, John Mikes could know that it was.
Brent
On 10/29/2012 12:53 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Brent, I think if a 'model' is *complete*, it is not a model, it is the real
thing.
Consequently it (as the real thing) is not provable from within - Godel, or not. (dON'T
ASK ME ABOUT "real", please <G>)
JM
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:21 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of
Perspective
by Bas C Van Fraassen.
......(quot4s deleted)
If the model is complete it must already include us - as well as what we
will think
about it and do with it. But then this will run into Godelian
incompleteness. If
it is true it will be unprovable within the model.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
