Search results

Suppose we are in year 2300 now, the Judgement day has suddenly arrived, and we are managed to be living in Paradise now. Imagine yourself in paradise, are you experiencing the loss of population in Paradise? Are some people in Paradise vanish while you are looking at them? No. Thus, saved...

Any physical system can be described by the case of Gödel, e.g., a model of a car is formal axiomatic system.

Please make difference between your word "proven" and my word "confirmed, tested".

One can speak logically: We can perfectly observe, that Socrates is a man. That holds true with extremely high probability. And with such high observation probability, a human dies. Thus, is expected, that Socrates will die. Indeed, we can perfectly observe, that he becomes more ill and more old...

Can all these truth in this math system be proven by using data and results of all reality, even outside this particular math system? No?

The future can invent any means: the technology of A-bombs, and other things of XX century, would be looking as divine miracle for people in Christ's time.

What sense in Popper's contribution then? Name just a thing, which is true, but can never be confirmed in a distant future.

The Poincare Conjecture: trivially connected 3D space without edge is homeomorphic to 3D sphere. The word "homeomorphic" means, that by non-singular deformation of initial space, one produces perfect sphere. But pasting in caps, cutting out strands, will not make such deformation.

According to corrected Popper's criterion: a thing is scientific, if it is confirmable. The pink rock is not confirmable with today technology, thus, today it is not scientific. And has no sense to check it in the future.

One can use Presumption of Innocence, if his statements are not in conflict with Bible and Established Science.

Sunday Schools at Churches are giving diplomas as well, that can do the job of any University. Because nobody mixes science and religion.

Disproof is simple: tell me your sources, otherwise you have made this up.

The Theorem of Kurt Gödel leads to conclusion, that no theory can be Absolutely Proved. Because must contain unproven assumptions. Does it mean, that Darwin's Theory is not a fact? But disproval of Gödel is simple: if nothing can be finally proven, then the Gödel's Theorem is not proven as...

But we can confirm a theory, if latter is not wrong.

In year 2019 Wikipedia writes on G. Perelman's proof of Poincare Conjecture: "... he wanted to cut the manifold at the singularities and paste in caps (NB! PROBLEM A), and then run the Ricci (NB! PROBLEM D) flow again... This deforms the manifold into round pieces with strands (NB! PROBLEM B)...

Sadly, but any kind of discussion has not started. Your comment is the only one. The theme has not made impact.

What Does it Take to Prove Fermat's Last Theorem? Grothendieck and the Logic of Number Theory | Bulletin of Symbolic Logic | Cambridge Core If it is necessary to use assumptions, or perhaps Unproven Axioms, why then we can not take the Fermat's Theorem as fact? Like was taken as fact the...

The Church can not make mistakes, because God does not allow that. God and Church are in Unity. A man's knowledge is the knowledge of his God. Thus, the God and His Church has Absolute Authority. ``If you forgive anyone's sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not...

There is Presumption of Guilt, and Presumption of Innocence. One is from satan - it is corruption of thought. Other is from God: "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, people of...