Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hou3c.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!ka
From: ka@hou3c.UUCP (Kenneth Almquist)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Math and Faith
Message-ID: <540@hou3c.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-May-84 10:57:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: hou3c.540
Posted: Mon May  7 10:57:02 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 8-May-84 00:21:40 EDT
References: <456@ihuxt.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 19

As I understand it, Goedel proved that given a reasonably powerful
language and a finite set of postulates, it is possible to express
statements in the language that can be neither proved nor disproved
using the postulates.

What limitations this places on physics is not clear.  Mathematics,
or at least the less abstract branches of mathematics, have been
able to proceed in spite of this limitation.  Although Godel proved
that statements that are independent of a set of axioms must exist,
he did not prove that any such statements would be of interest to
applied mathematitions.  My own belief is that physicists will never
achieve a complete description of the universe; they will always be
able to refine further even if they are not limited by their math-
ematical tools.

The belief that mathematics is an effective tool for understanding the
universe is not based upon a leap of faith; physicists use mathematics
because it appears to work.
					Kenneth Almquist