State[ment]vetse – state – 1F1

If GOD is Complete, GOD is inconsistent. If GOD is incomplete but consistent, GOD is Not GOD.

The GOD, The Absolute:

1). Every statement has ‘Not’ or ‘Not-statement’.

2). Any statement A is a ‘Not’ or Not-statement of any ‘other’ statement B. (So any B or C or statement is just Not-A, or NA in short)

Any A is the Contradiction of B, the ‘Not’ of A, i.e. NA.

CONTRADICTION is the KEY

The Complete (Sanskrit: PURÑA) is A-NA. The Complete (Sanskrit: PURÑA) isn’t A-NA. And is, and isn’t, and so on… This is Infidefiception.

This is what actually leads to, and this is why, and this is the reason why Gödel’s incompleteness theorem exists. This is the fundamental that actually is the reason for things like Gödel’s incompleteness. This is more fundamental than the incompleteness theorem, or incompleteness. This can be restated as stating that: there is no Absolute. The Absolute is No-Absolute. The Absolute is Absolute-No-Absolute. The absolute is Nothing. The Absolute is EVERYTHING. The Absolute is NOTHING = EVERYTHING. The Absolute is CONTRADICTION. The Absolute is Infidefiception. The Absolute is State[ment]verse.

Here are Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. These are mathematical theorems that relate to the philosophy in mathematics and to mathematical logic.

First Incompleteness Theorem: “Any consistent formal system F within which a certain amount of elementary arithmetic can be carried out is incomplete; i.e., there are statements of the language of F which can neither be proved nor disproved in F.” (Raatikainen 2015)

                                       Gödel’s 1st Incompleteness theorem


Second Incompleteness Theorem: “Assume F is a consistent formalized system which contains elementary arithmetic. Then {displaystyle Fnot vdash {text{Cons}}(F)}{displaystyle Fnot vdash {text{Cons}}(F)}.” (Raatikainen 2015)

                                    Gödel’s 2nd Incompleteness theorem
                                    Gödel’s 2nd Incompleteness theorem

Therefore, ‘GOD’ cannot be complete without being inconsistent or contradictory. GOD cannot be GOD, without CONTRADICTION.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On the nature of Nature

Image
  ON THE NATURE OF NATURE We have been discussing about the design and developing new and clearer theories that we think can precisely define the nature of nature. We have been trying to explain her grand creation on the basis of the observations or events that take place around us. We are doing so from the beginning of our human history. We observe, explain, predict and test. The explanation sometime and in some condition agrees and sometime in some other condition disagrees or fails. But still we are confident that we can describe nature of nature in a way that is certain by making a realization that our views still lack something. Today we are known about many subjects of nature but still we believe there is a perfect model that perfectly explains the design of nature. Is keeping such belief a mistake? Nature on the fundamental level has no law. Nature demands not to act in any certain perfect way or pattern. There is no any limitation to how nature can act. Nature is absolutely...
Read more

Absolutism – The search for the Absolute

I often ask myself, what? why?, I can find many hows, so hows are not primary for me. It is the easiest among them. No matter what the answer is, or how many answers there are, it all fades to insignificance. What does not fade in insignificance is the question itself. It stands strong and proud as ever. Trying to find the answer, the search has always been for an answer. The answer that is supposedly nothing but that is expected to be the representation of the Absolute – that which is invariant, immortal, Permanent. But everything, every answer fades and is temporary, goes extinct, vanishes into nothing, into insignificance. The ‘answer’ that was supposed to express and teach immortality, itself fades to non-existence, itself consumed by death so to speak. Never ever came to realization, that the Question that has been staring at me, and that I’ve been staring at, is the one that has never abandoned me. It has always stood there facing the answer that were supposed to destroy it, and,...
Read more

NOTHING = EVERYTHING

Image
What is Everything? Let me define everything as such: Everything is that which ‘exists’. It is that which is ‘real’. It is the ‘state’. Existence is experience, it is measure, it is ‘state’. So, for state A, A exists. For state B, state B exists, and so on. Now, does state B and/or state C and/or any state ‘not A’, exist for A? The answer is that for any state A, the state, any state, ‘not A’ or ‘A complement’, is absolutely undefined. One cannot say that “B exists for A”, one cannot say “B doesn’t exist for A”. So for state A, state A is everything, it is the universe for itself. For state B, state B is everything/universe, and so on. So, ‘everything’ is not absolute, it’s relative. Now, of course, for state A, state A is absolute, it is ‘absolute everything’ for itself. For B, B is ‘absolute everything’, and so on. The thing that needs to pointed out is that, any state is quantized. State is a quantized entity. It cannot be reduced to any smaller parts. It is the smallest entity, and...
Read more