[continued from previous message]   
      
   number statisfies a specific (complicated) Primitive Recursive   
   Relationship. A Relationship that can ALWAYS, for ANY number, be   
   evaluated in finite time.   
      
   There is no "diagonalization" in G. You are confusing different proof.   
      
   The question of G is a pure mathematical question, either a number does   
   or does not satisfy it.   
      
   In other words, your "logic" says some questions with factual answers   
   are just wrong.   
      
   In other words, your logic is proven to be self-inconsistant, as   
   statements provably true are considered to be illogical.   
      
   >   
   >> Maybe it could handle everything YOU can comprehend, but that isn't much.   
   >>   
   >> After all, you have shown you can't comprehend Godel's logic, or how   
   >> infinity works, and it seems you don't actually understand how   
   >> induction works, so nothine proven by it.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> True is a formal system means that there is a (possible   
   >>>>>>>> infinite) sequence of the Truth Preserving operations (defined   
   >>>>>>>> in the system) from the Fundamental Truth Makers (axiom) of the   
   >>>>>>>> system.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> The problem is that any statement True by only an infinite   
   >>>>>>>> sequence of Truth Preserving operations can't be proven, as   
   >>>>>>>> Proofs are defined as Finite sequences.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)