Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 4 Mar 2001 22:41:51 +0100
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Cc:        freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: CVSROOT modules
Message-ID:  <20010304224151.A3264@roaming.cacheboy.net>
In-Reply-To: <xzpbsrh5ihv.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>; from des@ofug.org on Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 10:31:08PM %2B0100
References:  <20010301234712.A47820@mollari.cthul.hu> <200103011801.f21I1VW48363@freefall.freebsd.org> <xzpd7c147wi.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20010302033532.A69557@cartier.cirx.org> <20010301234712.A47820@mollari.cthul.hu> <200103021706.f22H6Ad58131@harmony.village.org> <20010302154947.C41267@mollari.cthul.hu> <20010304185408.A2288@roaming.cacheboy.net> <xzpbsrh5ihv.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[moved to -chat, which I'm thankfully not on atm :-]

On Sun, Mar 04, 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > .. and that brought me to remember something I saw somewhere.
> > 
> > From 'Principia Mathematica', Volume 1, A N Whitehead and B Russell.
> > Page 362:
> > 
> > "From this proposition it will follow, when arithmetical addition has
> > been defined, that 1 + 1 = 2."
> 
> ISTR that _Principa Mathematica_ is the book (nay, monument) that
> Gödel set out to abolish. PM's authors were of the opinion that
> everything could be described using mathematics, whereas Gödel proved
> that no matter what level of abstraction you chose, there would always
> be statements that couldn't be formulated at that level.
> 
> (based on my recollections of Hofstädter's _Gödel, Escher, Bach: An
> Eternal Golden Braid_)

ISTR that too. I just don't want to find my copy of that and search
through it before I go to bed. :-)

In any case, this book mentions right before the Mathematica "quote"
that Russell observed that "the mathematician can never put onto paper
the 'complete process of reasoning', but rather must settle for 'such
an abstract of the proof as is sufficient to convince a properly
instructed mind.'" It then runs off to question why Russell then went to
co-author PM.

Perhaps there's a lesson in here somewhere? :)

Thanks guys. I now have the motivation to re-read or finish some of the
books I have lying on my shelf gathering dust. :-P


Adrian


-- 
Adrian Chadd			"Programming is like sex:
<adrian@freebsd.org>		   One mistake and you have to support for
				    a lifetime." -- rec.humor.funny


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010304224151.A3264>