You can't do thatEodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:54 amIt is complete due to law 3, however computation is not limited to completeness as computation as an axiom must progress to further axioms in order to be defined. Computation is an extension of these laws but these laws are not limited to computation.
It is the axioms which produce the structure of the system itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_seed
You can't define a set of axioms, then another set of axioms which justifies problems which may arise from the first set of axioms.
Whatever structure emerges from your axioms will emerge. This emergent structure is subject to further analysis.
Completeness is a structural, not axiomatic property of a logical system.
The only thing that can be said about a system, any system, is that it is e.g the universe exists.
In your language it's a dot. In my language it's a system.
This is simply recognition. A holistic pre-supposition. There is no progression.
It is saying: 1
Any further claims about the universe (progression) requires drawing distinctions. e.g one dot becomes 2.