Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by stopachka 2043 days ago
The point of Godel’s idea, is that he proved “ Lisivka's numbers", has a formula that can’t be proven.

Try going through the essay, and point out where the “incorrect” numbers were formed. You may be surprised to find that all statements were “correct” in the definition you are thinking of. The mathematical term is “primitive recursive” and “well-formed”
1 comments
drran 2043 days ago
You missed the point. Any "bad" Godel's number can be interpreted as "good" Lisivka's number. We have ambiguity here, because a number can refer to any formula in infinite number of sets.

> We can go further. We can even construct PM-Lisp formulas in PM-Lisp!

No, we cannot.

link
stopachka 2043 days ago
When you say "You missed the point.", and "No, we cannot" -- your words come off as though you are supremely confident, and a bit condescending. This makes me not want to engage deeper with you.

To see how it feels:

No, drran, you have missed the point. Read it again, maybe you'll get it.

link
drran 2043 days ago
4667698044567788679899973453457778678980909855464564564578787890665467786780909875744564756867978980890785745635646767586445454536665474747746767457575890112345678999077554344567787923424234234234246566797899707980980983453453454353453453453534534534534

This number is equivalent to the proof that I'm right. Godel was genius!

link