Are all mathematically true statements provable?

Pythagorean theorem represented with rocks will always be true before humans do it,

If unproven statements aren't true, are you claiming that we have proven everything there is to be proven?

it's a gut feeling

and I took the b8. feelsbadman

No. Some of them are even outright incongruous to reality.

...

I never said that. I said we don't know whether something is true or not if there is no proof.

define truth

plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski-truth/

okay so it is just slapping the word truth on something that is not truth by essence. Glad to hear there is no truth in math nor logic.

Hey, blame reality.

preferring fantasies over reality would be nihilistic, better blame people's fantasy

Define define.

Define bait.

A series of arguments based on evidence and logic.

For example:
The appendix and the wisdom tooth is the reason why we think humans evolved.

The expansion of the universe is why we think the Big Bang happened.

this guys just writing gibberish, r-right?

This: Instead of saying
>The Gödel sentence is true but unprovable"
say
>The Gödel sentence can neither be proven true nor false
and you got a statement that still mind bending, but removed from the "true, from a point of view outisde of proof theory" spiel

And, in any case, the value of Gödels theorem is to show that a theory involving basic arithmetic can't be proven consistent using another theory that also has basic arithmetic build into it. E.g. implying you can't prove the consistency of any set theory with a weaker theory.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems

literally /thread/

>appendix and the wisdom tooth is the reason why we think humans evolved
Wrong. A wave function satisfying the developing of perturbations due to decreasing local energy is why humans evolved.

>expansion of universe is why BB happened
Wrong. Isotropy and nonzero CMB (cosmic background radiation) is.

Hello Veeky Forums, I need your help as I'm a 83 IQ brainlet and discovered arithmetics a couple of days ago.
We have [math]N_p=\frac{p^p-1}{p-1}[/math] and we find that [math]N_p\equiv1\mod p^2-p[/math] and that if [math] l [/math] is a prime divisor of [math] N_p [/math], then it doesn't divide [math] p^2-p [/math]. How the fuck does this lead to [math] l\equiv1\mod p [/math]

Thanks in advance.

>how the fuck
If you are accustomed to using emotions as a tool for solving problems, you are not suited for science. Try economics, engineering, or labor.

Take the continuum hypothesis.
It's been proven that you can't prove neither the hypothesis nor its contradiction.
Yet either the hypothesis or its contradiction must be true, so whichever is is true but not provable.

watch
>this statement cannot be disproved.

This thread is about mathematics, not English.

Fucking moron.

>It's been proven that you can't prove

Trips have you cornered, OP. Checkmate, game and set, ready, match

>Yet either the hypothesis or its contradiction must be true
says the undergrad

>Yet either the hypothesis or its contradiction must be true,

nope. both are *inaccessible* from the usual set of acioms and either could be chosen as an additional axiom without upsetting consistency. how does it feel to claim that adding the "false" one to a set of axioms preserves consistency?

State the meaning of.

Iff you insist on a formal system

found the engineer

Intuitionism is a mental illness.

Intuitionism has nothing to do with it.

...

autism

Yes but how well can they be proven is the question. There are usually more than one way to prove something, especially with regards to mathematics and geometry.

Yes it can

...

maybe