The Australian philosopher colin leslie dean points out Godels theorem is invalid because it uses invalid axioms ie axiom of reducibility it is the biggest fraud in mathematical history
everything dean has shown was known at the time godel did his proof but no one meantioned any of it

note he says he is going to use AR
but
Russell following wittgenstien took it out of the 2nd ed due to it being invalid
godel would have know that
russell and wittgenstien new godel used it but said nothing
ramsey points out AR is invalid before godel did his proof
godel would have known ramseys arguments
ramsey would have known godel used AR but said nothing

every one knew AR was invalid
they all knew godel used it
but nooooooooooooo one said -or has said anything for 76 years untill dean
the theorem is a fraud the way godel presents it in his proof it is crap

it is poor logic to quote a source for authority when that source is being said to be invalid
it matters not what godel says as he proved nothingi
as russell wittgenstein ramsey said his axiom is invalid

dean is concerned only with what godel did - and not what has been done since as they will end in meaninglessness togodel

The quotes I gave were Godel’s incompleteness theorems you say they are invalid. They are what godel did. they are his theorems. I wasn’t quoting for authority I was quoating the theorems you say are invalid. If they are invaild you must surely think:

1)that any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elemenary can be both consistent and complete.

a system must beable to prove its own consistency while being consistent.

If not then you must conclude his theorems are correct.

Surely you can’t be saying his proofs are invaild but lead too correct conclusions???

Absurdities or meaninglessness or irrationality is no hindrance [sic] to something being ‘true’ rationality, or, Freedom from contradiction or paradox is not a necessary an/or sufficient condition for ‘truth’: mathematics and science examples

nevertheless iliterate dean has shown godel is invalid and every one knew he used invalid axioms and said nothing
i think it really shits you than an iliterate can do that-it undermines your whole ontology about credibilty and the importance of grammar
if dean can be iliterate and destroy the greatest mathematician of the 20th century then any iliterate could do the same and that really threatens you i think

Here’s the problem with illiterate Deano. I can’t suffer through his work, so I can’t tell if he’s correct or not.

But, it discredits him in this way: if he’s smart enough to do anything, it should be to get someone intelligent to proofread his work and/or translate it. Since he obviously isn’t, how can I trust his work? I can’t.

That’s true. However, disseminating his work is dependent on grammar. And it takes away from his credibility.

Can you? Please explain to me any fallacy in calculus. I’m not saying there isn’t one, I’m just saying you’re probably incapable of conveying one to me.

dean shows credibility has nothing to do with grammar only the facts -and that shits you
as it shows literacy is irrelevant to truth
look why dont you just say if the facts are right or wrong- it cant be that hard to read the words and understand them

russel wittgenstien and ramsey understood the maths and they all said AR is invalid and said nothing when godel used it
so if you want comment on dean you must have to comment on russell witt and ramsey as they understood the maths

I’m not even touching Goedel, Russel, Ramsey, or Wittgenstein because I don’t know enough about them. I’m sure they were all very good at math. I’m talking about you.

You attacked calculus and said it had paradoxes. I ask you, are you an expert in calculus? Where is this paradox?

And why, if you can’t do the math, are you agreeing with Dean? It’s because you have some bogus beef with everything.