The proofs of Kleene, Chaitin and Boolos for Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem are studied from the perspectives of constructivity and the Rosser property. A proof of the incompleteness theorem has the Rosser property when the independence of the true but unprovable sentence can be shown by assuming only the (simple) consistency of the theory. It is known that Gödel's own proof for his incompleteness theorem does not have the Rosser property, and we show that neither do Kleene's or Boolos' proofs. (...) However, we show that a variant of Chaitin's proof can have the Rosser property. The proofs of Gödel, Rosser and Kleene are constructive in the sense that they explicitly construct, by algorithmic ways, the independent sentence(s) from the theory. We show that the proofs of Chaitin and Boolos are not constructive, and they prove only the mere existence of the independent sentences. (shrink)

We present an abstract framework in which we give simple proofs for Gödel’s First and Second Incompleteness Theorems and obtain, as consequences, Davis’, Chaitin’s and Kritchman-Raz’s Theorems.

The famous Gödel incompleteness theorem states that for every consistent, recursive, and sufficiently rich formal theory T there exist true statements that are unprovable in T . Such statements would be natural candidates for being added as axioms, but how can we obtain them? One classical approach is to add to some theory T an axiom that claims the consistency of T . In this paper we discuss another approach motivated by Chaitin's version of Gödel's theorem where axioms claiming the (...) randomness of some strings are probabilistically added, and show that it is not really useful, in the sense that this does not help us prove new interesting theorems. This result answers a question recently asked by Lipton. The situation changes if we take into account the size of the proofs: randomly chosen axioms may help making proofs much shorter .We then study the axiomatic power of the statements of type “the Kolmogorov complexity of x exceeds n ” in general. They are Π1Π1 statements of Peano arithmetic. We show that by adding all true statements of this type, we obtain a theory that proves all true Π1Π1-statements, and also provide a more detailed classification. In particular, as Theorem 7 shows, to derive all true Π1Π1-statements it is enough to add one statement of this type for each n if strings are chosen in a special way. On the other hand, one may add statements of this type for most x of length n and still obtain a weak theory. We also study other logical questions related to “random axioms”.Finally, we consider a theory that claims Martin-Löf randomness of a given infinite binary sequence. This claim can be formalized in different ways. We show that different formalizations are closely related but not equivalent, and study their properties. (shrink)

We give a new proof for Godel's second incompleteness theorem, based on Kolmogorov complexity, Chaitin's incompleteness theorem, and an argument that resembles the surprise examination paradox. We then go the other way around and suggest that the second incompleteness theorem gives a possible resolution of the surprise examination paradox. Roughly speaking, we argue that the flaw in the derivation of the paradox is that it contains a hidden assumption that one can prove the consistency of the mathematical theory in which (...) the derivation is done; which is impossible by the second incompleteness theorem. (shrink)

We examine the question of whether scientific theories can ever be complete. For two closely related reasons, we will argue that they cannot. The first reason is the inability to determine what are “valid empirical observations”, a result that is based on a self-reference Gödel/Tarski-like proof. The second reason is the existence of “meta-empirical” evidence of the inherent incompleteness of observations. These reasons, along with theoretical incompleteness, are intimately connected to the notion of belief and to theses within the philosophy (...) of science: the Quine-Duhem (and underdetermination) thesis and the observational/theoretical distinction failure. Some puzzling aspects of the philosophical theses will become clearer in light of these connections. Other results that follow are: no absolute measure of the informational content of empirical data, no absolute measure of the entropy of physical systems, and no complete computer simulation of the natural world are possible. The connections with the mathematical theorems of Gödel and Tarski reveal the existence of other connections between scientific and mathematical incompleteness: computational irreducibility, complexity, infinity, arbitrariness and self-reference. Finally, suggestions will be offered of where a more rigorous (or formal) “proof” of scientific incompleteness can be found. (shrink)