Incompleteness Ex Machina · HackerPapers discussions

Incompleteness Ex Machina — mentioned by ajkjk

Sat, 28 Jun 2025 18:59:06 GMT

Yeah, but the vexing part is "how can that be true for e.g. N=643 but not N=642"? What happens at whatever number it starts true at? Incidentally, Gödel's theorem eventually comes down to a halting-like argument as well (well, a diagonal argument). There is a presentation of it that is in like less than one page in terms of the halting problem---all of the Gödel-numbering stuff is essentially an antiquated proof. I remember seeing this in a great paper which I can't find now, but it's also mentioned as an aside in this blog post: https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=710 wait jk I found it…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Incompleteness Ex Machina — HN submission

Fri, 07 Apr 2023 01:30:05 GMT

Incompleteness Ex Machina [pdf] [2019]

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Incompleteness Ex Machina — HN submission

Tue, 13 Dec 2022 19:37:11 GMT

Incompleteness Ex Machina

3 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Incompleteness Ex Machina — mentioned by fogof

Fri, 10 Sep 2021 03:38:46 GMT

"Incompleteness ex Machina" by Sebastian Oberhoff, is a nice paper-length exposition https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.04569.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Incompleteness Ex Machina — mentioned by gre

Sun, 01 Dec 2019 16:25:05 GMT

There's another paper called "Incompleteness Ex Machina" with several proofs of both the first and second incompleteness theorems. https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.04569

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.