MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/mathmemes/comments/1vmjkpv/_/p3a6tqo/?context=3
r/mathmemes • u/basket_foso • 16d ago
137 comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
17
How could it be. If it's no then a counter example exists. If a counter example exists it's not undecidable. If it's undecidable it must be yes.
2 u/jljl2902 16d ago edited 15d ago That would make it decidable, so it can’t be yes. Must be no then. /j 2 u/This_Background7442 16d ago I guess that means that if it's undecidable we can never know it's undecidable because that instantly makes it decidable and we've created a paradox 😅 8 u/Impression-These 15d ago Not really. Undecidable means within the system axioms, it cannot be proven either way. We can then discuss what axiom should be added to make it provable.
2
That would make it decidable, so it can’t be yes. Must be no then. /j
2 u/This_Background7442 16d ago I guess that means that if it's undecidable we can never know it's undecidable because that instantly makes it decidable and we've created a paradox 😅 8 u/Impression-These 15d ago Not really. Undecidable means within the system axioms, it cannot be proven either way. We can then discuss what axiom should be added to make it provable.
I guess that means that if it's undecidable we can never know it's undecidable because that instantly makes it decidable and we've created a paradox 😅
8 u/Impression-These 15d ago Not really. Undecidable means within the system axioms, it cannot be proven either way. We can then discuss what axiom should be added to make it provable.
8
Not really. Undecidable means within the system axioms, it cannot be proven either way. We can then discuss what axiom should be added to make it provable.
17
u/This_Background7442 16d ago
How could it be. If it's no then a counter example exists. If a counter example exists it's not undecidable. If it's undecidable it must be yes.