= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
911truther comments on Formulas of arithmetic that behave like decision agents - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (33)
Your work is wrong. To apply diagonal lemma the definition of phi must be a formula, since you write |- (which is not a formula in PA) I assume you meant it as shorthand for Godels Bew (which is), but you can't existentially quantify Bew like you did in line 3 of the definition.
"Your work is wrong" is an unfair characterization of presence of a minor technical inaccuracy.
Yes, I really mean phi to be a formula based on the provability predicate. The third line is really shorthand for
where Sub is a function that replaces the first two free variables in the Gödelized formula with a and b. So we can quantify over a and b.
I suppose I should mention this in the post.