]

**Gödel, Escher, Bach/**

__Chapter 14/ On Formally Undecidable Propositions.__On this chapter we consider the idea of bending the very fabrics of nature, by bending the very fabrics of all known geometry. It sounds off-putting I know, but I consider it this way, because that to me seems what artificial intelligence would end up doing. It is a traverse into another dimension we do not know, the manipulation of our own evolution, the idea of jumping out of a system to develop a new one. Hofstadter may not share those concerns, but he does acknowledge a change, however implicit he may do so.

This chapter talks more about TNT, geometry, physics, and tries to define our nature and the nature of the universe.

Furthermore we consider Gödel theorem and the issues he brings about with them. There is an interesting quote, of which I cannot remember with entire precision, were they state that the struggle with TNT is not with expression, but with proof, and he invites us to think it metaphorically into our own lives. What we say and fo is simply, it exists in our higher leveled mind, or software, but the proof we require to truly validate what we are saying is deep inside, and perhaps even unreachable.

Mu resurfaces, that formal system that we spoke of on the initial chapters. Many of my peers, including my facilitator Blum, have suggested that M stands for mechanical, while I stands for Intelligence, and they contemplated the idea that U stands for Zen, though it appears vague and inconsistent to me. I neither agree nor disagree with the idea of positioning Zen as the U mode of the system, but I do think that it is important nonetheless. Some say the U moe stands for inconsistency, but wouldnt that itself be inconsistent?

On a very concrete, simple, insipid level, this chapter considers the inconsistencies within certain formal systems, including the MU, TNT, Propositional Calculus, and the of course Godels theorem.

This chapter talks more about TNT, geometry, physics, and tries to define our nature and the nature of the universe.

Furthermore we consider Gödel theorem and the issues he brings about with them. There is an interesting quote, of which I cannot remember with entire precision, were they state that the struggle with TNT is not with expression, but with proof, and he invites us to think it metaphorically into our own lives. What we say and fo is simply, it exists in our higher leveled mind, or software, but the proof we require to truly validate what we are saying is deep inside, and perhaps even unreachable.

Mu resurfaces, that formal system that we spoke of on the initial chapters. Many of my peers, including my facilitator Blum, have suggested that M stands for mechanical, while I stands for Intelligence, and they contemplated the idea that U stands for Zen, though it appears vague and inconsistent to me. I neither agree nor disagree with the idea of positioning Zen as the U mode of the system, but I do think that it is important nonetheless. Some say the U moe stands for inconsistency, but wouldnt that itself be inconsistent?

On a very concrete, simple, insipid level, this chapter considers the inconsistencies within certain formal systems, including the MU, TNT, Propositional Calculus, and the of course Godels theorem.