Complexity No Bar to AI

Re:Complexity No Bar to AI by monstersinF on Sunday February 21, 2021 @06:19PM (#26218365)

Also I don’t understand the impact of Wittgenstein‘a work on Godel’s discovery, could you clarify for me? What are the implications. The consensus I’ve read indicates it’s a misguided interpretstion

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Complexity No Bar to AI by ProfHewitt on Monday February 22, 2021 @11:20PM (#26233779)

Wittgenstein's devastating critique of [Gödel 1931] came afterward.

See the article referenced in this discussion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Complexity No Bar to AI by monstersinF on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @09:13PM (#26245806)

Thanks for the response Professor. What do you make of the following article though? It concludes that the critique is not devastating to Gödel

http://wab.uib.no/agora/tools/alws/collection-6-issue-1-arti...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Complexity No Bar to AI by ProfHewitt on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @10:23PM (#26246236)

Unfortunately, the author Timm Lampert did not quote the most

powerful Wittgenstein proof that existence of I'mUnprovable

means that mathematical foundations are inconsistent.

Wittgenstein's more powerful version is much more

devastating.

As mentioned previously in this discussion, the following

article explains why I'mUnprovable must not and does not

exist in foundations:

"Recrafting Foundations of Mathematics"

https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3603021

[ Parent | on HN ]