Propelled by a discussion at work getting almost out of order (almost !), I feel obliged to write something on Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem (read stuff here).
Basically, this theorem implicates that any mathematical system cannot be fully described within itself and that it will always ‘end’ on being based certain axioms for which no formal proof exist. The philosophical consequence of this is interesting, I think…well, more precisely, my thoughts are:
… if the collective human-made collection of mathematical sciences always boils down to the ten axioms, then the modern science in principle could be ‘false’ or not exhaustively described. There is probably no practical consequences of this, since our everyday experience and modern world does not see the theorems contradicted… nor would we want to. Science appears to ‘work’ and to be explaining everything in our practical, everydays lives, yes. The scientific methods are valid, yes (in apparent contrary to various ‘spiritual’ and religious ‘claims’…).
However, in the context of the existence of multiple (and unknown) dimensions or even the existence of God, I think this debate is interesting… because the Theorem, in my point of view, excludes the widespread and to me superficial assumption that ‘Science’ is ‘proofed’ and ‘Religion is fraud’. On the very large scale, nothing is finally proofed ! … and we should be humble to that observation ! or at least reserve the possibility that our science is neither describing the Universe exhaustively nor correctly at the present time.
And would that not apply to any Time ?
