On 1/24/2015 12:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Do you see the relationship between Gödel's second incompleteness theorem and the modal
formula
<>t -> ~[] <>t ?
I don't see it, because I don't understand what <>t means. t is a tautology, the negation
of a contradiction. Yet you seem to use t to mean "has a model"? And I'm not clear on
how one is supposed to know the true propositions of a model.
Brent
(<=>
~[]f -> ~[] ~ [] f,
<==>
[]<>t -> ~<>t,
which shows that in G (and thus for the machine 3p self-reference), consistency, <>t,
is a simple solution to []x -> ~x.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
