from Mathematical Girl: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem

  • Syntactic Methods
    • Antonym: Semantic Methods
      • The difference is whether to use truth values.

        • I’m not quite sure.
        • In syntactic methods, there is no concept of what is true or false, it’s just about syntax.
        • Even if we define something like “axioms,” they are neither true nor false, they are just “axioms.”
    • Understanding it as processing sequences of symbols as sequences of symbols mechanically to do mathematics, like programming (for now).
      • This gives me a familiar impression because it’s like programming.
    • It’s about “doing mathematics in mathematics.”
    • Dealing with formal systems.
    • Creating a miniature model of mathematics called “formal system H.”
      • Wow~
      • Defining the symbol IMPLY: as

        • It’s like an alias or wrapper in programming.
        • It can be replaced as a string without being interpreted, similar to C++‘s using.
        • However, I’m not quite sure why this definition is made.
          • Maybe it’s not necessary to think about it when dealing with formal systems, but I want to understand the underlying intention if I want to comprehend it.
          • Semantically, if we consider “if a then b,” its truth value matches the truth value of “not a or b.”
            • But I still don’t get it.
            • Thinking about it in terms of “If apples are delicious, then apple pie is also delicious,”
              • Apples are delicious & apple pie is delicious: true
              • Apples are delicious & apple pie is not delicious: false
              • Apples are not delicious & apple pie is delicious: true
              • Apples are not delicious & apple pie is not delicious: true
            • Does it mean that anything is okay as long as a is false?
              • I can kind of understand it.
      • In formal systems, by mechanically executing operations on defined strings, something like “inference” in semantics can be done.