/sci/ - Science & Math

This brilliant man.

>Without: "This statement is not provable." That's a whole other can of worms.
>wtf am I reading
>mfw

Gödel was a convinced theist. He rejected the notion of others like his friend Albert Einstein that God was impersonal.
He believed firmly in an afterlife, stating: "Of course this supposes that there are many relationships which today's science and received wisdom haven't any inkling of. But I am convinced of this [the afterlife], independently of any theology." It is "possible today to perceive, by pure reasoning" that it "is entirely consistent with known facts." "If the world [Welt] is rationally constructed and has meaning, then there must be such a thing [as an afterlife]."[21]
In an unmailed answer to a questionnaire, Gödel described his religion as "baptized Lutheran (but not member of any religious congregation). My belief is theistic, not pantheistic, following Leibniz rather than Spinoza".

Do you think you know better than the greatest logician of all time?

Hey OP; this is a really great lecture on Godel that gives you a summary of some of his contributions as well as a historical context for what mathematics was up to in the early 20th century.

Also discusses the philosophical implications of some of these ideas (the lecturer is actually a philosophy professor).

It's very informative, highly recommend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2KP1vWkQ6Y

The empiricist/atheist's worst fucking nightmare:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG7MyZtGSB0

Dude, really guys? really?

oh /sci/

>>3527980

Shit is about to get real

will someone ever prove this fucker wrong?

i value skinny introspective boys.

lets do genetic screening for them and sterilise the rest.

Great troll, or GREATEST troll?

fuck you hilbert

>>2619838
>>2619838
>Math, by it's very construction, is perfect.
>mfw

Do Gödel's incompleteness theorems mean that a Turing machine can never become singularity?

Does anyone here understand Gödel's stuff?

Don't forget Kurt Göbbels

Problem, math?

Hey mathematicians of /sci/
Just wanted to let you know that nothing you do can be proved
Peace,
Kurt

Problem, mathfags?

So if I have two vectors in a normal boring Cartesian orthonormal coordinate system computing their cross product is simple. I just find the "determinant" of the matrix where the rows are the unit vectors, the components of the first vector and the components of the second vector, respectively.

But Cartesian coordinates are pretty boring. What happens if I instead vectors in a curvilinear system? Say, spherical or cylindrical coordinates. Can you still find the cross product in the same manner?

If not, how would you compute it? Is it possible without switching to Cartesian coordinates and back?

>>1913863
>prove ANYTHING with mathematics
Bitches don't know about my incompleteness theorem

>>1904599
>implying we aren't scientists

>>1550721
My face when I approve of this.

Explain Godel's incompleteness theorem to me.