Make sure to wear your rationalist sneakers when you go!

I hope you'll treat me fairly as a person and actually read and try to understand my comments instead of jumping to conclusions based on my "score".

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.

To save you some time: the standard response is "I'm being censored! You're an Eliezer-cult! All these downvotes are just because you're scared of the Truth!".

I never said anything like this and I never invoked Eleizer. I don't understand why you're telling me off for something I didn't do. Look at my post history if you don't trust me.

What you are doing is not fitting into the community norms of discussion, like research and linking/referring to specific sources

It only makes sense to do so when making a claim. Yet people on this site have refused to back up their own claims with citations because apparently "I'm not worth bothering with".

but there are almost never flame wars

I never flamed anyone. The only guy who is calling people names "like troll for example" is you (well now that you've done it others are following your lead too, well done..).

Are you enjoying wasting your time on this website?

Not really, I didn't expect to get rejected so harsly. I've read all the sequences twice and been rational for years so I don't know what the problem is. What's the point of all this meta discussion, why is everyone trying to drag me into these metadiscussions and brand me as a troll after I passed 100 downvotes. We should get back onto the actual topic.

You are trying to submit too fast. try again in 6 minutes.

It's a terrible idea to try to learn theorems by memorization, if all you want to do is pass math tests fine.. but if you want to understand mathematics it's definitely going to do more harm than good.