German translation see: 

        What Does The Name Of The Almighty God (JHWH)
        Mean in Epistemoloy And Propositional Calculus?

Excerpt of P
atent Description:

US     US 6172941 (filing date Dec. 16, 1999)
EP     EP 01145406 A1 (filing date Dec. 03,1999)

Author: Erich Bieramperl, 4040 Linz, Austria


Consequences for metamathematics, propositional calculus, epistemology and philosophy are:


1) Because there are no deterministic point of times, the status of a system can neither be
    ascertained to be at a certain "point in time", nor "points in time" can be determined for a

    future status. There is nowhere any type of determinism. Since the classical physics as

    well as the quantum theory are based on the postulate that a system is in a certain status

    at a certain "point in time" (in the first case as points of phase space, and in the other

    case as probability distributions in phase space), neither theory can be completely

    consistent (see also THOMAS BREUER / 1997) [1].

2) Regarding WIGNER (1961)[2], an absolutely universally valid theory would have to be

    capable of describing the origin of human consciousness. The auto-adaptation theory

    described herein could be capable of this; the quantum theory cannot. (Wigner postulated

    that complex quantum mechanics delivers a usable description of the physical reality

    only when there is no "subjective sensing". The author holds the view that subjective

    sensing also exists in atomic and subatomic structures).

3)  Sequences of elapse times like TW and TW' are definable as strings of an axiomatic formal
     system; albeit this system is a "time domain system" and not an arithmetic systems in the
     usual sense of the classic number theory. Indeed, said formal system shows at least one
     axiom and derives from it continuous strings of numbers through the application of a certain
     algorithm. Regarding TURING, an axiomatic number theoretical system can be produced

     also by a mechanical procedure, which produces "formulas and algorithms".For this

     reason, the known logic theorems of GOEDEL, TARSKI or HENKIN are absolutely

     applicable on such a model. GOEDEL`s incompleteness theorem [3] shows that each

     extensive number theoretical model includes consistent formulations which cannot be

     proven with the rules of the model, and which therefore are undecidable. This is valid also

     to metatheoretical models and to meta-metatheoretical models etc. For example, a self- 

     referential metatheoretical sentence like the type of the Goedel formulation <I am provable>

     is neither provable nor disprovable. A decision procedure for this proposition leads to an

     infinite regress. TARSKI showed that a decision procedure for number theoretical "truth"[4]

     is also impossible, and leads to an infinite regress. Thus, a self-referential sentence of
     the type <I am provable> is admittedly "true", but not "provable". It follows, that "provability"

     is a weaker notion than "truth". HENKIN showed that there are sentences, that assert their

     own provability and  "producibility" in a specific number theoretical model and which are

     invariable "true"[5]. A self-referential sentence based on Henkins theorem would be: <It

     exists a number theoretical model in which I am provable>. Strings of quantized elapse

     times like TW and TW' approach the domain of validity of HENKIN`s theorem. Applying

     Henkins logic, these strings assert: <I will be produced to proved>. TW and TW's are

     therefore strings or sentences that are produced in a specific formal model, which induces

     its own decision procedure on truth, consistence, completeness and provability through

     continued self-generation (see also description to Fig.10).
     In contrast to self-referential strings or sentences of the Gödel or Henkin type, strings of

     elapse times are never asserted to be "true", "consistent", "complete" or "provable" to a

     certain "point in time", because within the "number theoretical model" in which they are

     produced, no "points of time" exist. This model also prohibits superior semantics or

     metatheories or meta-metatheories. It is plainly obvious that each formal system, each

     metatheory, each meta-metatheory and each semantics, in which axioms, strings or

     sentences of any type are formulated, is the result of continued autonomous adaptation

     (which is based on the quantization of elapse times) and therefore a derivation of the model

     described in this work.

4)  The cognition, that a specific formal system exists asserting absolute universal validity, from
     which everything has been produced and to whom all other systems have to be subordinated,

     is not new. Already in early antiquity, many years before PLATO and ARISTOTLE, the

     Hebrew Scriptures (2. Moses 3: 14) let this <source of all logic> say from itself: "JHWH"

     (spoken: Jahwe or Jehovah), that is about: "I shall be proved"[6]. This sentence asserts its

     own decision procedure on provability, truth, completeness  and consistence; through a

     specific formal system, that it "induces to be".

5) There is no "cognition" without "recognition".


[1]  Thomas BREUER (1997) "Quantenmechanik: Ein Fall für Goedel" ISBN 3-8274-0191-7
[2]  Eugene WIGNER (1961) "Remarks on the Mind-Body-Question",
      see also: Roger Penrose:
"The Emperor`s New Mind"/    ISBN 0-19-286198-0 (page 381)
[3]  Kurt Goedel
"On Formally Undecidable Propositions in Principia Mathematica and Related
      Systems I. (1931),

      see also: Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach" (pg. 17) ISBN 0-394-74502-7   
[4]  Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach"
(page 579, 580: "Tarski`s Theorem")
[5]  Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach"
(page 541: "Henkins Sentences")
[6]  See WIKIPEDIA  (note: the engl. JHWH-web-site became removed by some nerds in 2007.
      So the link to this site has been deleted too.)  


If  you have any questions to this web-site, please contact:  info