Prev: UML - Modeling Interfaces in "complex" systems
Next: warning: ignoring induction and analogy may be harmful to your code
From: CoreyWhite on 19 Feb 2007 18:47
On Feb 19, 6:27 pm, David Marcus <DavidMar...(a)alumdotmit.edu> wrote:
> CoreyWhite wrote:
> > Godel's theorem's roughly tell us that we can't have a system that is
> > both complete and consistent.
>
> Roughly.
>
> > Well what if you had 2 systems that
> > were both consistent, and sorted through them both to create a third
> > system that was complete.
>
> Sorted through them? What does that mean?
>
> > And then all you would need to do is impose
> > a condition to act as 4th dimensional TIME, outside of mathematics, to
> > reference all 3 sets together from within the sets.
>
> > Anyone following me here?
>
> No.
>
> --
> David Marcus


Here is an example, because if what I am saying is true it could apply
to things other than simply mathematics.

If we took the bible, and devided it into two parts. The first part
being the old testament, and the second part being the new testament.
We could say both books are contradictory yes? But if we look at them
both as seperate objects then they don't contradict and are
consistent, except to say they are not complete.

So all we need to do is create a third book with both the new
testament and old testament combined and call it Christianity, and
this system is complete but inconsistent. Now we have 2 problems
instead of just one.

But if we have a 4th book, writen after all 3 religions came into
being. And this 4th book put all 4 religions into a harmonious
context, and rewrote each of the other 3 books to include itself.
Then this 4th book would be unquestionable.

See?

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: UML - Modeling Interfaces in "complex" systems
Next: warning: ignoring induction and analogy may be harmful to your code