/sci/ - Science & Math

>mfw my silly copypasta still gets repoasted

>>4889157

This is me. I really thought /sci/ would have something better than this fag.>>4815397

It is generally accepted that given an inconsistency in any system, that inconsistency can be manipulated to create paradoxes anywhere in the system. In reference to mathematics, then, would this mean that all principles are really just based around 1 principle that's been manipulated to create proofs for other principles, or are there other principles that simply exist. If a "paradox" exists, why can't it be accepted as a principle. If not, and I don't believe any actually do, then how does one objectively prove something?? At one point can someone objectively say that something is true but NOT provable???
Without: "This statement is not provable." That's a whole other can of worms.
Is there a method to figuring out hard derivations for things, one that always works, without someone else having to derive them first?