Re: the RM and Godel
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:42:34 -0500
Message-ID: <ufUve.4$h52.605_at_news.uswest.net>
On 6/25/2005 1:01 AM, mountain man wrote:
> I seem to recall there is no "solid ground" in mathematics
> in that the formalisms of mathematics cannot lead to
> anything resembling "absolute truth".
>
>
> Here is an interesting article on the history of mathematics
> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/CDMTCS/chaitin/cmu.html
>
>
> How do RM theorists view the work of Godel, Turing and
> Chaitin? What are the implications of Godels theorem of
> incompleteness, or Chaitin's random truth, to the RM?
>
>
Mathematics has never claimed "Absolute Truth". It is a system of logical deductions and in some small cases inductions based on "reasonable" axioms. But what is surprising is that many "pure" maths have eventual applicability to the natural world. For example, number theory now forms the basis for most advanced cryptography.
Human constructed models, mathematical or not, are only an approximation of nature and hence open to constant improvement.
Pure mathematics on the other hand is a playground for the mind. No need for applicability. Received on Mon Jun 27 2005 - 16:42:34 CEST