Fred Posted October 27, 2002 Share Posted October 27, 2002 123 fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mav Posted October 27, 2002 Share Posted October 27, 2002 456 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FH Posted October 27, 2002 Share Posted October 27, 2002 GCSE level stuff I see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hibster. Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 789 Does this mean that FH can't continue the sequence ? 😬 If there's beer, we'll drink it. If not, we'll wait. 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FH Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 D'O(h)...S (or is that too subtle ? FH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooby dooby doo Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 well done children. now we'll go on to question 2. 2) 1x3 = 3 HOOPY Membership Number 4136 R706KGU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Elizabeth Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Godel would tell us that any sufficiently complex number system are, by their very nature, incomplete. So 1X3 = 3 might be true, but it is not necessily provable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FH Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Gödel's Theorem has been used to argue that a computer can never be as smart as a human being because the extent of its knowledge is limited by a fixed set of axioms, whereas people can discover unexpected truths ... It plays a part in modern linguistic theories, which emphasize the power of language to come up with new ways to express ideas. And it has been taken to imply that you'll never entirely understand yourself, since your mind, like any other closed system, can only be sure of what it knows about itself by relying on what it knows about itself. He proved it impossible to establish the internal logical consistency of a very large class of deductive systems - elementary arithmetic, for example - unless one adopts principles of reasoning so complex that their internal consistency is as open to doubt as that of the systems themselves ... Second main conclusion is ... Gödel showed that Principia, or any other system within which arithmetic can be developed, is essentially incomplete. In other words, given any consistent set of arithmetical axioms, there are true mathematical statements that cannot be derived from the set... Even if the axioms of arithmetic are augmented by an indefinite number of other true ones, there will always be further mathematical truths that are not formally derivable from the augmented set. Coo You learn something every day although understanding is a different matter 😳 I'm only a bird after all ☹️ On a brighter note, my "Word for the Day" is agelast - someone who never laughs Well, there are fair few of those around FH Edited by - fullharness on 28 Oct 2002 12:37:16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Elizabeth Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Gödel rocks ! Basically he took the old Liar or Epimenides paradox. "This statement is False" and turned it into mathematic formula (using a very clever thing called Godel Numbering, which I can never quite get the hang of) which can refer to itself....which says :- "This fomulae is unprovable" A formula that is True, but cannot be proved within the system. Hence all sufficiently complex number systems contain axioms that are true, but not provable/derivable. So are incomplete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Huh? I'm still stuck on this 1x3 thing Your only suppose to blow the doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FH Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Well stick around in this 'seat of learning' CN and your knowledge will increase threefold p.s. I've been biting my fingers every time I see your signature.... at the risk of being told orf for being a pedant, the quote should be, IIRC " you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off" 😬 FH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mav Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Arhhhhh FH Said a naughty word sir ❗ Viv 😬 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Elizabeth Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Indeed she did. "Seat" is very rude...you should "Situpon" like my grandma did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooby dooby doo Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 phew ❗ I've been resisting saying that for months FH ❗ HOOPY Membership Number 4136 R706KGU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Wilson Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Tsk tsk. You lot obviously havn't read Simon's location 😳. Of course I refrained from biting because I know he gets satisfaction from it 🙆🏻 😬. Tee Hee! Peardrop Edited by - Peardrop on 28 Oct 2002 20:07:59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet Elizabeth Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Technically "irritating someone" is not a location. It is an activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Wilson Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Yet he's a champion of the art ! Unfortunately I'm usually the target of his activities 😳! Peardrop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Damn i've been found out Your only suppose to blow the doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Removing "bloody" from the signature was deliberate Your only suppose to blow the doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 is this better Your only suppose to blow the b****y doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 I've just had my grammer corrected so now my sig should be right You're only supposed to blow the b****y doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hibster. Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Would you like your spelling corrected too ? Paul If there's beer, we'll drink it. If not, we'll wait. 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 go on then You're only supposed to blow the b****y doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FH Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Gramm-ar the science of language If 'twere grammer, we'd have grammetically correct; grammer schools etc. From the Greek 'gramma' - a letter FH p.s. CN, I forgot to thank you for pandering to my sensibilities Edited by - fullharness on 28 Oct 2002 21:15:59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper nut Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 I see. You were right, i'm learning already You're only supposed to blow the b****y doors off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now