to prevent inconsistencies in foundations of mathematics.
Strong types prevent construction of I’mUnprovable using the
following recursive definition:
I’mUnprovable:Proposition<i>≡⊬I’mUnprovable
hand side of the definition because I’mUnprovable is a
propositional variable in the right-hand side.
Consequently,
I’mUnprovable:Proposition<i>⇒I’mUnprovable:Proposition<i+1>
in [Gödel 1931] is that the Gödel number of a proposition
does not capture its order. Because of orders of
propositions, the Diagonal Lemma [Gödel 1931] fails to
construct the proposition I’mUnprovable.
to prevent inconsistencies in foundations of mathematics.
Strong types prevent construction of I’mUnprovable using the
following recursive definition:
Note that (⊬I’mUnprovable):Proposition<i+1> in the right-hand side of the definition because I’mUnprovable is a
propositional variable in the right-hand side.
Consequently,
which is a contradiction. The crucial issue with the proofsin [Gödel 1931] is that the Gödel number of a proposition
does not capture its order. Because of orders of
propositions, the Diagonal Lemma [Gödel 1931] fails to
construct the proposition I’mUnprovable.