Sorry, but I'm a mathematician... so everything you physicists do is just a model to me. Ever since I realized (via Goedel) that there aren't even any complete and consistent theories for logic, I sort of figured that there would never be a complete and consistent theory for physics. (Let me know if you find one.) In the mean time, I'm still really impressed with the work physicists do! I really should finish working through Gravitation some day... that's cool stuff.
Doesn't the Goedel just require an axiom taken to be true but not provable? Science has that: The Principal of Uniformity of Nature, which is the logical basis of all scientific induction.
If you don't believe science rests on at least one truth that science can't itself prove (called faith by some, an axiom by others), then Godel's incompleteness theorem says you don't believe science is consistent.
All of science requires scientific induction to work. We can't prove it out of nowhere, and without assuming(believing) it, or some other axiom that can be used to prove it (e.g. the Principle of Uniformity of Nature), we can't prove anything with science.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but I'm a mathematician... so everything you physicists do is just a model to me. Ever since I realized (via Goedel) that there aren't even any complete and consistent theories for logic, I sort of figured that there would never be a complete and consistent theory for physics. (Let me know if you find one.) In the mean time, I'm still really impressed with the work physicists do! I really should finish working through Gravitation some day... that's cool stuff.
Doesn't the Goedel just require an axiom taken to be true but not provable? Science has that: The Principal of Uniformity of Nature, which is the logical basis of all scientific induction.
If you don't believe science rests on at least one truth that science can't itself prove (called faith by some, an axiom by others), then Godel's incompleteness theorem says you don't believe science is consistent. All of science requires scientific induction to work. We can't prove it out of nowhere, and without assuming(believing) it, or some other axiom that can be used to prove it (e.g. the Principle of Uniformity of Nature), we can't prove anything with science.