XiXiDu comments on Edward Nelson claims proof of inconsistency in Peano Arithmetic - Less Wrong

13 Post author: JoshuaZ 27 September 2011 12:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (115)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: XiXiDu 27 September 2011 02:53:10PM 16 points [-]

More here, including a comment by Terence Tao.

Comment author: [deleted] 27 September 2011 05:12:13PM *  9 points [-]

Specifically, Tao's comment:

I have read through the outline. Even though it is too sketchy to count as a full proof, I think I can reconstruct enough of the argument to figure out where the error in reasoning is going to be. Basically, in order for Chaitin's theorem (10) to hold, the Kolmogorov complexity of the consistent theory T has to be less than l. But when one arithmetises (10) at a given rank and level on page 5, the complexity of the associated theory will depend on the complexity of that rank and level; because there are going to be more than 2^l ranks and levels involved in the iterative argument, at some point the complexity must exceed l, at which point Chaitin's theorem cannot be arithmetised for this value of l.

(One can try to outrun this issue by arithmetising using the full strength of Q_0^*, rather than a restricted version of this language in which the rank and level are bounded; but then one would need the consistency of Q_0^* to be provable inside Q_0^*, which is not possible by the second incompleteness theorem.)

I suppose it is possible that this obstruction could be evaded by a suitably clever trick, but personally I think that the FTL neutrino confirmation will arrive first.

He's such a glorious mathematician. <3

Comment author: breckes 27 September 2011 08:48:14PM 6 points [-]

He gave a more detailed comment on the n-Category Café.