You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Tetronian comments on Explained: Gödel's theorem and the Banach-Tarski Paradox - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: XiXiDu 06 January 2012 05:23PM

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

Comments (40)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 07 January 2012 01:52:16PM 0 points [-]

Depends if you only want to show that set theory is incomplete, you don't need Gödel numbering and you can more-or-less turn Smullyan's explanation into a complete proof in a straightforward manner.

You're right, I hadn't thought about that.