Oh no ! Yet Another Flawed Incompleteness Proof
From time to time I get asked to comment on an incompleteness proof. Many of these proofs are so obviously flawed that it is easy to demonstrate where the flaw is. While initially I thought that I would deal with them all on the same page, I discovered that as more flawed proofs accumulate one page was becoming rather cumbersome, so I have now put them on separate pages, even if some of them can be dealt with in a few paragraphs. A list of the pages dealing with these obviously flawed proofs is given below.
- An Incompleteness Proof by Francesco Berto
- An Incompleteness Proof by Bernd Buldt
- An Incompleteness Proof by Dan Gusfield
- An Incompleteness Proof by Byunghan Kim
- An Incompleteness Proof by Dennis Müller
- An Incompleteness Proof by Arindama Singh
- An Incompleteness Proof by Sebastian Oberhoff
- An Incompleteness Proof by Antti Valmari
It is noteworthy that in many such proofs, the quality of the proof seems to be in inverse proportion to the esteem with which the authors view their own work.
As site owner I reserve the right to keep my comments sections as I deem appropriate. I do not use that right to unfairly censor valid criticism. My reasons for deleting or editing comments do not include deleting a comment because it disagrees with what is on my website. Reasons for exclusion include:
Frivolous, irrelevant comments.
Comments devoid of logical basis.
Comments with excessive number of different points.
Questions about matters that do not relate to the page they post on. Such posts are not comments.
Comments with a substantial amount of mathematical terms not properly formatted will not be published unless a file (such as doc, tex, pdf) is simultaneously emailed to me, and where the mathematical terms are correctly formatted.
Reasons for deleting comments of certain users:
Bulk posting of comments in a short space of time, often on several different pages, and which are not simply part of an ongoing discussion. Multiple anonymous usernames for one person.
Users, who, when shown their point is wrong, immediately claim that they just wrote it wrong and rewrite it again - still erroneously, or else attack something else on my site - erroneously. After the first few instances, further posts are deleted.
Users who make persistent erroneous attacks in a scatter-gun attempt to try to find some error in what I write on this site. After the first few instances, further posts are deleted.
Difficulties in understanding the site content are usually best addressed by contacting me by e-mail.
Note: a password enables editing of comments, an email enables notification of replies