|Site Role||Member, Guest Speaker Questioner|
|Favourite philosophers||The Cynics who never wrote much since they were sad.|
If we cannot prove a theorem we need to expand our alphabet!
And if there are no more theorems to prove, then we still must nominalize and denumerize our alphabet to increase our intelligence.
Employee: "Is this a fancy test?"
Tyrell Computer Psychologist: (Internal thought): "No, but, I'll make it one."
This level of psychoanalysis has never been witnessed before.
If the methodology cannot be entertained as true, then the outcome must be ascertained as the proof of the methodology. If the methodology is determined by the outcome of the truth of the issue, then those more concerned with truth itself are going to, at least, have the moral superior outcome.
-Myself, and seemingly no methodology satisfied the premise.
Gödel's incompleteness theorem applies to formal languages with countable alphabets. So it does not rule out the possibility that one might be able to prove 'everything' in a formal system with an uncountable alphabet OR expand the alphabet to account for new variables.